Project Mercury - A Chronology
NASA
This page copyright © 2002 Blackmask Online.
http://www.blackmask.com
Preface
Acknowledgments
Foreword
Introduction
PART I (A)
Major Events Leading to Project Mercury
PART I (B)
Major Events Leading to Project Mercury
PART II (A)
Research and Development Phase of Project Mercury
PART II (B)
Research and Development Phase of Project Mercury
PART III (A)
Operational Phase of Project Mercury
PART III (B)
Operational Phase of Project Mercury
Prepared by James M. Grimwood,
Historical Branch, Manned Spacecraft Center, Houston, Texas,
as MSC Publication HR-1
Office of Scientific and Technical Information
Project Mercury stands as the free world's first program for manned
exploration of space. History will show that it has been remarkably
successful for a number of reasons. Primarily, all of the technical
objectives necessary to the successful completion of the program were
accomplished. Also, Mercury experience has provided this nation with
the capability to implement and manage future projects on a level of
quality and effectiveness that would otherwise have been impossible.
Possibly of greater significance is the fact that Project Mercury was
conceived and carried out solely for peaceful purposes, and all major
events have been fully documented in the public news media, including
television coverage of each manned launch from Cape Canaveral.
It is remarkable that the original goal of Mercury, that of
orbiting a man in space and returning him safely to earth, was
accomplished in just 3 years after the prime contract was awarded. This
element of the program's success is especially significant when
compared to development efforts for more conventional manned aircraft
in which development and qualification periods of 5 or more years are
not uncommon. The rapid pace with which the critical program milestones
were completed was possible only through the dedicated efforts of many
thousands of people. Because of the success in meeting prescribed
technical objectives and the reliable operation of the spacecraft and
launch vehicle systems it was possible to eliminate certain
qualification flights early in the program and broaden the original
scope of Mercury into the recent and final manned 1-day mission of 22
orbits or 34 hours duration. The valuable experience gained in the
design, development, and operation of the Mercury spacecraft, as well
as in management of such a program, has already resulted in a profound
effect on the Gemini and Apollo projects and will continue to do so to
an even greater extent.
This document presents a brief but accurate chronology of important
events throughout the Mercury program and attests to the rapid pace at
which the Mercury development and operation were carried out. Many of
the critical decisions which were later significantly to affect the
direction of the program are mentioned, and the manned flights, from
the first sub-orbital mission of May 5, 1961, to the final orbital
mission conducted on May 15 and 16, 1963, are documented. Project
Mercury is now history, and only time will allow a complete assessment
of its full impact on this nation's technology and contribution in
expanding the space frontier. But it can be stated without reservation
that this project will be remembered as one of the outstanding
technical achievements that this country has contributed to world
history.
Kenneth S. Kleinknecht
Manager, Mercury Project
Material for this document was accumulated from widespread sources,
and for this reason the author is indebted to a number of individuals.
In fact, several persons contributed to such a degree that formal
recognition is warranted. These were as follows: Mr. Paul E. Purser,
Special Assistant to Director, MSC; Mrs. Phoncille De Vore of Mr.
Purser's office; Lt. Colonel John A. Powers, Public Affairs Officer,
MSC; Mr. William M. Bland, Deputy Manager of Project Mercury, MSC; Mr.
Robert W. Fricke, Technical Information Division, MSC; Miss Retha
Shirkey, Librarian, MSC; Mr. Ralph Shankle, Public Affairs Office, MSC;
Mr. David S. Akens, Marshall Space Flight Center; Mr. Alfred Rosenthal,
Goddard Space Flight Center; Dr. Eugene M. Emme, the NASA Historian;
and Mrs. Helen Wells of the NASA Headquarters Historical Office.
Especial thanks is given to Mrs. Frankie J. Fisher, the branch
secretary, for typing, layout, and research.
JMG
 |
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Washington, D.C. 1963
|
Project Mercury is now history. In its short span of four years,
eight months, and one week as the Nation's first manned space flight
program, Mercury earned a unique place in the annals of science and
technology. The culmination of decades of investigation and application
of aerodynamics, rocket propulsion, celestial mechanics, aerospace
medicine, and electronics, Project Mercury took man beyond the
atmosphere into space orbit. It confirmed the potential for man's
mobility in his universe. It remains for Projects Gemini and Apollo to
demonstrate that potential.
Project Mercury was not only a step in the history of flight
technology, it was a major step in national commitment to space
research and exploration and to man's struggle to fly. One has only to
contrast it with the Wright Brothers' achievements of sixty years ago,
when two meticulous men, with a bicycle shop, a handmade wind tunnel,
determination and industriousness, and little financial means or
support, accomplished controlled, powered flight. The austere contrast
of the Wrights or of Professor Goddard's rocket work with today's
Government-sponsored, highly complex space program, involving thousands
of persons and hundreds of Federal, industrial, and university
activities, is eloquent testimony to the new prominence of science and
technology in our daily lives. The evolution and achievements of
Project Mercury offer an outstanding example of a truly national effort
in the advancement of knowledge and its application.
The Project Mercury story must be examined in the full context of
its fundamental features—scientific, engineering, managerial—in the
dynamic human environment of national and international life. Indeed,
the national commitment to Project Mercury and its successors requires
a valid perspective on the potential accomplishments of science and
technology as well as on the response of a democratic society to the
challenges of its day.
This chronology of Project Mercury represents only a beginning on
the full history, just as Mercury was only a first step in the
development of American space transportation. No chronology is a
history. This volume is but a preface to what is yet to come. Yet it
offers us a catalog of processes by which man progresses from ideas
originating in the human mind to the physical devices for man's travel
to the moon and beyond.
Hugh L. Dryden
Deputy Administrator
A decision by National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Headquarters in October 1961 extended the Mercury program by adding
1-day missions after three- and six-orbit flights. Also, during the
same year, follow-on manned space programs, later known as Projects
Gemini and Apollo, began to take form. These events were rather
unusual, for here was program expansion on a higher level of difficulty
prior to the time that the basic objectives of Project Mercury, the
launch and safe return of a man from earth orbit, had been attained.
Obviously, Project Mercury, first guided by the Space Task Group and
then by the Manned Spacecraft Center (the successor organization), had
built up a high confidence factor as to the potential success of the
space venture. To a large degee, this action was graphically supported
at that point in time by the highly successful suborbital flights of
Alan Shepard and Virgil Grissom and the orbital flight of the
“mechanical astronaut.”
Project Mercury's formal program approval date was October 7, 1958,
and 3 years and 2 weeks from the award of the development and
production contract by NASA to the McDonnell Aircraft Corporation of
St. Louis, Missouri, the orbital flight of John Glenn aboard the
Mercury spacecraft, “Friendship 7,” transpired. When this uncommonly
brief time scale is compared with other major programs of national note
and urgency, the question of how man was committed so soon to orbital
flight is certain to be posed.
The key to this phenomenal success was concurrency of effort. That
is, all facets of the program leading to manned space flight were
guided along a simultaneous route and not by the concept of qualifying
each phase before development work began on another. From the outset,
work was being accomplished on all components of the spacecraft,
adapting the launch vehicles, readying the worldwide tracking network,
selecting and training astronauts, and developing ground support
equipment for systems checkout and astronaut training. No detail was
too small to warrant the attention of scientists and engineers who were
charged with making the awesome decisions that would commit man to
orbital flight. Every organization that had acquired any technical
proficiency or had built up a capability in a particular field that
could be applied to the space program was visited, and arrangements
were made for assistance, facilities, or the use of equipment. Also,
the test and reliability program to which Mercury hardware was
subjected was exhaustive and thorough. In fact, this unusually close
attention refutes the “crash program” connotation often cited. The term
“accelerated” more aptly describes the effort. That the managers were
not swayed toward a crash program even in the face of an American
public anxiously awaiting the advent of manned space flight, was
unusual.
There were a number of catalysts which created the conditions
leading to the approval of the Mercury project, and many of these
circumstances and events contributed directly to the goal of attaining
manned space flight. Shortly after World War II, experimental missile
tests were conducted in the White Sands, N. Mex. area to altitudes
beyond the sensible atmosphere. During this same period, rocket
aircraft research was initiated with the objective of piercing the
sound barrier. Then from the early to the mid-fifties the National
Advisory Committee for Aeronautics and industry scientists and
engineers made the assault on the thermal barrier to resolve the
reentry problem for the ballistic missile. These excellent mediums of
research formed a natural progression for the NACA to attack the
problems of manned space flight. Another factor contributing to the
growing interest in the national space program was the planning and
research that was devoted to the artificial earth satellite program for
the International Geophysical Year. Then the flight of Sputnik I in
1957 furnished the “yeast” necessary for the American public to support
a manned space flight project. Finally, the Atlas launch vehicle had
reached a point in development at which serious consideration could be
given for its application to manned space flight. At that time the
Atlas was the only American launch vehicle capable of lifting a payload
for the manned orbital requirements.
This document chronicles the three major phases of the Mercury
program—conception, research and development, and operation. Even in
this brief form, the reader can readily observe the meticulous
attention to detail that was given by personnel of the NASA, other
Government agencies, and American industry associated with the conduct
of the program to assure mission success in our first manned step in
space.
James M. Grimwood
MSC Historian
March 16
At a National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) seminar, in
Washington, D.C., with Air Force and Navy personnel attending, NACA
personnel proposed a jet-propelled transonic research airplane be
developed. This proposal ultimately led to the “X” series research
airplane projects.
Eugene M. Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: An
American Chronology of Science and Technology in the Exploration of
Space: 1915—1960 (Washington: NASA HHR-3, 1961), p. 47.
Hereinafter cited as Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1915—1960.
December 9
A meeting was held at the Langley Aeronautical Laboratory, Langley Air
Force Base, Virginia, to discuss the formation of an organization that
would devote its efforts to the study of stability and maneuverability
of high-speed weapons (guided missiles). From the outset, work was
pointed toward supersonic flight testing. In early 1945, Congress was
asked for a supplemental appropriation to fund the activation of such a
unit, and in the spring of that year the Auxiliary Flight Research
Station (AFRS—later known as the Pilotless Aircraft Research
Division) was opened on Wallops Island, Virginia, with Robert R.
Gilruth as its director. On July 4, 1945, the AFRS launched its first
test vehicle, a small two-stage, solid-fuel rocket to check out the
installation's instrumentation.
Data supplied by Joseph A. Shortal, Chief, Applied
Materials and Physics Division (formerly PARD), Langley Research
Center, May 28, 1963.
1944 (during the year)
Congress appropriated funds to carry out a rocket aircraft research
program. The National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, the Air
Force, and the Navy were designated participating members.
Charles V. Eppley, The Rocket Research Aircraft
Program: 1946—1962 (Air Force Flight Test Center, Edwards Air
Force Base, Calif.), p. 1. Hereafter cited as Eppley, Rocket
Research Aircraft Program: 1946—1962.
March
The Army Air Forces established Project RAND, which in part included
the study of satellite applications.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 53.
May 8
The Chief of Naval Operations directed the Navy's Bureau of Aeronautics
to make preliminary investigations in the field of earth satellite
vehicles.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 54.
May 12
Project RAND filed a report entitled “Preliminary Design of an
Experimental World Circling Space Ship,” which indicated the technical
feasibility of building and launching an artificial satellite.
House Report No. 360, Military Astronautics
(Preliminary Report), 87th Congress, 1st Session, p. 2.
October 14
The XS-1 rocket plane made the first supersonic manned flight by
traveling 700 miles per hour (mach 1.06 at 43,000 feet altitude) over
Muroc Dry Lake, California, with Captain Charles E. Yeager at the
controls. The sound barrier was broken.
Eppley, Rocket Research Aircraft Program: 1946—
1962, p. 6.
October (during the month)
Due to the number of competing study contracts on satellites that were
being submitted, the Department of Defense assigned responsibility to
coordinate this work to the Committee on Guided Missiles of the
Research and Development Board.
House Rpt. 360, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 2.
January 15
General Hoyt S. Vandenberg, Vice Chief of Staff, United States Air
Force, approved a policy calling for the development of earth
satellites at the proper time.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 59.
June 11
A V-2 designated “Albert” in honor of its passenger was launched at
White Sands, New Mexico. Albert, the first American primate in space,
died of suffocation. On June 6, 1949, Albert II was launched into space
but died on impact. During 1949 two other flights of this type were
conducted. In each case, the primate survived the flight, but succumbed
before his capsule was located.
David S. Akens, Origins of Marshall Space Flight
Center, pp. 8-9. Hereinafter cited as Akens, Origins of MSFC.
July 13
Convair's MX-774 test vehicle, later designated the Atlas and used as a
launch vehicle in the Mercury program, was test-fired for the first
time.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 60.
December 29
The first Secretary of Defense, James V. Forrestal, in his initial
report to President Harry Truman, included a brief item indicating that
the earth satellite program, which was being carried out independently
by the military services, was assigned to the Committee on Guided
Missiles for coordination.
House Rpt. 360, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 2.
May 11
President Harry S. Truman signed a bill authorizing the missile test
range, which is now the Atlantic Missile Range at Cape Canaveral,
Florida.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 62.
January 16
The Government decided to resume MX-774 studies, and the project was
then designated the Atlas. Several test vehicles had been fired in 1948
and 1949, after which the Convair MX-774 (Atlas) missile project had
been shelved. The company, however, had continued to fund a research
program.
House Report No. 67, A Chronology of Missile and
Astronautic Events, 87th Congress, 1st Session, p. 14.
September 20
The first successful recovery of animals from rocket flight in the
Western Hemisphere was made when a monkey and 11 mice survived an
Aerobee launch to an altitude of 236,000 feet.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 68.
January 30
An NACA report was issued covering several projects and proposals for
the flight of manned and unmanned vehicles to altitudes above the earth
where atmospheric density was very low. The substance of these reports
was presented at the June 24, 1952, meeting of the Committee on
Aerodynamics. After the presentation, committee member Robert J. Woods
recommended that basic research be initiated on the problems of space
flight and stated that the NACA was the logical organization to carry
on this work. To accomplish this task, a small working group was
established to analyze the available information on the subject of
space flight. The objective of this group was to arrive at a concept of
a suitable manned test vehicle that could be constructed within 2
years.
Minutes of Meeting, NACA Committee on Aerodynamics,
June 24, 1952.
May 16
The Special Committee for the International Polar Year (later
designated the International Geophysical Year), was established.
House Rpt. 67, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 16.
June 18
H. Julian Allen of the NACA Ames Aeronautical Laboratory, Moffett
Field, California, conceived of the blunt nose principle for reentry
vehicles. On this date Allen stated he had determined that the blunt
form would be suitable for any body reentering the earth's atmosphere.
This principle was first used on the intercontinental ballistic missile
nose cone and was later incorporated into the configuration of the
Mercury spacecraft.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 69; Information supplied by Jack Talmadge, Ames Research Center,
May 28, 1963.
June 24
The NACA Committee on Aerodynamics recommended that NACA increase its
research efforts on the problem of manned and unmanned flight at
altitudes between 12 and 50 miles and at speeds of mach 4 through 10.
As a result of this recommendation, the Langley Aeronautical Laboratory
began preliminary studies on this project and immediately identified
several problem areas. Two of these areas were aerodynamic heating and
the achievement of stability and control at very high altitudes and
speeds. Of the two, Langley considered aerodynamic heating to be the
more serious, and, until this problem was resolved, the design of
practical spacecraft impractical. (See January 30, 1952, entry).
Minutes of Meeting, NACA Committee on Aerodynamics,
June 24, 1952.
June (during the month)
The Navy's Johnsville, Pennsylvania, human centrifuge began operations.
This installation was later designated the Aviation Medical
Acceleration Laboratory (AMAL) and was used extensively in the training
of the Mercury astronauts.
House Rpt. 67, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 16.
1952 (during the year)
The NACA Langley Aeronautical Laboratory Pilotless Aircraft Research
Division started the development of multistage, hypersonic-speed,
solid-fuel, rocket vehicles. These vehicles were used primarily in
aerodynamic heating tests at first and were then directed toward a
reentry physics research program.
Message, NASA Space Task Group to NASA Hq., July 5,
1960.
Personnel of NACA Langley and Ames Aeronautical Laboratories were
engaged in research on aerodynamic characteristics of reentry
configurations. Knowledge acquired from these efforts along with those
of industry and the military services was used in Project Mercury,
proved the ablation theory for the Army's Jupiter missile development
program, and was used in the Air Force intercontinental ballistic
missile nose cone reentry program.
Message, NASA Space Task Group to NASA Hq., July 5,
1960.
July 30
Preliminary studies were completed by C. E. Brown, W. J. O'Sullivan,
Jr., and C. H. Zimmerman at the Langley Aeronautical Laboratory
relative to the study of the problems of manned space flight and a
suggested test vehicle to investigate these problems. One of the
possibilities considered from the outset of the effort in mid-1952 was
modification of the X-2 airplane to attain greater speeds and altitudes
of the order of 200,000 feet. It was believed that such a vehicle could
not only resolve some of the aerodynamic heating problems, but also
that the altitude objective would provide an environment with a minimum
atmospheric density, representing many problems of outer space flight.
However, there was already a feeling among many NACA scientists that
the speed and altitude exploratory area should be raised. In fact, a
resolution to this effect, presented as early as July 1952, stated that
”. . . the NACA devote . . . effort to problems of unmanned and manned
flights at altitudes from 50 miles to infinity and at speeds from mach
10 to the velocity of escape from the earth's gravity.” The Executive
Committee of NACA actually adopted this resolution as an objective on
July 14, 1952.
Letter, NACA to High Speed Flight Research Station,
Subj: Discussion of Report on Problems of High Speed, High Altitude
Flight, and Consideration of Possible Changes to the X-2 Airplane to
Extend its Speed and Altitude Range, July 30, 1953.
August 20
The first Redstone missile was test-fired by the Army at Cape
Canaveral, Florida. The Redstone, on which research and development had
begun in 1950, was later used as a launch vehicle in the manned
suborbital flights and in other development flights in Project Mercury.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 72.
May
The NACA determined the characteristics of what later became the X-15
rocket aircraft, one of the steps to manned space flight.
Eppley, Rocket Research Aircraft Program: 1946—
1962, p. 24.
June 25
In a meeting, Dr. Wernher von Braun, Frederick C. Durant III, Alexander
Satin, David Young, Dr. Fred L. Whipple, Dr. S. Fred Singer, and
Commander George W. Hoover agreed that a Redstone rocket with a Loki
cluster as the second stage could launch a satellite into a 200-mile
orbit without major new developments. Project Orbiter was a later
outgrowth of this proposal and resulted in the launching of Explorer I
on January 31, 1958.
House Rpt. 67, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 19; Emme,
Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 75; and James M.
Grimwood, History of the Jupiter Missile System (Army Missile
Command, Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, July 1962).
July 9
After 2 years' study of problems that might be encountered in manned
space flight, a joint group—NACA, Air Force, and Navy—met in
Washington to discuss the need for a hypersonic research vehicle and to
decide on the type of aircraft that could attain these objectives. The
NACA proposal was accepted in December 1954, and a formal memorandum of
understanding was signed to initiate the X-15 project. Technical
direction of the project was assigned to the NACA. On November 9, 1961,
the X-15 reached its design speed of over 4,000 miles per hour and
achieved partial space conditions on July 17, 1962, when it reached an
altitude of 314,750 feet. By the latter date, the Mercury spacecraft
had made two manned orbital flights.
Eppley, Rocket Research Aircraft Program: 1942—
1946, pp. 24, 44, 45.
August 7
The Air Force School of Aviation Medicine at Randolph Field, Texas,
received the first specifically built space cabin simulator.
House Rpt. 67, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 19.
October 14
The first American four-stage rocket was launched by the Pilotless
Aircraft Research Division of NACA's Langley Laboratory at Wallops
Island.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 76.
March
Dr. Alan T. Waterman of the National Science Foundation presented
President Dwight Eisenhower with a plan to implement the United States'
portion of the International Geophysical Year satellite experiment.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 79.
July 29
President Eisenhower endorsed the IGY proposal for the launching of
small earth-circling satellites.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 78.
The United States announced that it would launch earth satellites
during the 18-month IGY (July 1957 through December 1958).
House Rpt. 67, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 22.
September 9
Project Vanguard began operations. On this date the Department of
Defense wrote a letter to the Department of Navy authorizing the Navy
Research Laboratory to proceed with the Vanguard proposal. The
objective of the program was to place a satellite in orbit during the
IGY, and responsibility for carrying out the program was placed with
the Office of Naval Research.
John P. Hagen, “The Viking and the Vanguard: History
of Rocket Technology;” in special issue of Technology and Culture
(Fall 1963).
The Department of Defense's Stewart Committee reviewed the
alternatives for an IGY satellite program: wait for the development of
an Atlas launcher, use a modified Redstone, or develop a rocket derived
from the Viking missile. The committee voted seven to two in favor of
abandoning Project Orbiter (Redstone) and developing Vanguard (the
Viking derivative). Secretary Donald Quarles ruled with the committee
majority in the Department of Defense Policy Committee, which approved
the decision.
House Rpt. 67, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 23;
Grimwood, History of the Jupiter Missile Program; Akens,
Origins of MSFC, pp. 38-40.
October 2
The National Academy of Sciences established a Technical Panel for
Earth Satellite Program, with Richard E. Porter serving as chairman.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 79.
The NACA Langley and Ames Aeronautical Laboratories developed
high-temperature jets, wind tunnels, and other facilities for use in
materials and structures research at hypersonic speeds. These
facilities provided, among other things, data proving that ablation was
an efficient heat-protection method for reentry vehicles.
Message, NASA Space Task Group to NASA Hq., July 5,
1960.
February 1
The Army Ballistic Missile Agency (ABMA) was activated at Redstone
Arsenal, Huntsville, Alabama, to complete the development of the
Redstone missile and to develop the Jupiter missile. The Redstone was
later used in two Mercury manned suborbital flights, and in other
research and development flights.
Helen Joiner, History of the Army Ballistic
Missile Agency, 1 Feb.-30 June 1956.
March
Project 7969, entitled “Manned Ballistic Rocket Research System,” was
initiated by the Air Force with a stated task of recovering a manned
capsule from orbital conditions. By December of that year, proposal
studies were received from two companies, and the Air Force eventually
received some 11 proposals. The basis for the program was to start with
small recoverable satellites and work up to larger versions. The Air
Force Discoverer firings, which effected a successful recovery in
January 1960, could be considered as the first phase of the proposed
program. The Air Force program was based upon a requirement that forces
no higher than 12g be imposed upon the occupant of the capsule. This
concept required an additional stage on the basic or “bare” Atlas, and
the Hustler, now known as the Agena, was contemplated. It was proposed
that the spacecraft be designed to remain forward during all phases of
the flight, requiring a gimballed seat for the pilot. Although the Air
Force effort in manned orbital flight during the period 1956-58 was a
study project without an approved program leading to the design of
hardware, the effort contributed to manned space flight. Their
sponsored studies on such items as the life-support system were used by
companies submitting proposals for the Mercury spacecraft design and
development program. Also, during the 2-year study, there was a
considerable interchange of information between the NACA and the Air
Force.
House Rpt. 1228, Project Mercury, First Interim
Report, 86th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 2; Comments by Clotaire
Wood, NACA, Jan. 26, 1960, on Draft, NIS Meeting at ARDC Headquarters,
June 19, 1958; Memo, Maxime A. Faget, NACA Langley, to Dr. Hugh Dryden,
Director, NACA (no subject), June 5, 1958; Comments by Maxime A. Faget
on “Outline of History of USAF Man-in-Space RDProgram,” Missiles and
Rockets, Vol. 10, No. 13 (Mar. 26, 1962), pp. 148-149.
May 3
The Air Force disclosed that a $41 million guided missile production
facility would be built at Sorrento, California, for the Atlas launch
vehicle. Convair was announced as the prime contractor.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 82.
August 24
A five-stage, solid-fuel rocket test vehicle, the world's first, was
launched to a speed of mach 15 by the NACA Langley Aeronautical
Laboratory's Pilotless Aircraft Research Division.
House Rpt. 67, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 27.
October
NACA scientists were engaged in preliminary studies of the need for a
follow-on, manned-rocket research vehicle to the X-15.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 83.
November
Personnel of the Air Research and Development Command approached NACA
officials on the possible cooperation of NACA in a research airplane
project as a follow-on to the X-15 project. NACA agreed to consider the
plan and directed its laboratories to initiate feasibility studies
relative to the range of speed for the proposed vehicle and an estimate
of the time frame in which the vehicle could be developed.
NACA Study of the Feasibility of a Hypersonic
Research Airplane, Sept. 3, 1957, p. 3.
1956 (during the year)
Personnel of the NACA were studying the possibilities of utilizing
existing ballistic missile boosters, which were then under development,
for manned orbital space flight.
Letter, Paul E. Purser, MSC, to Mary Stone Ambrose,
Policies and Regulation Branch, NASA Hq. (no subject), undated.
January 14
The United States proposed before the United Nations Assembly that
study be initiated toward international agreements assuring the use of
outer space for peaceful purposes only.
House Document No. 71, Message from the President of
the United States, U.S. Aeronautics and Space Activities: January 1
to December 31, 1958, p. 18.
June 11
The first launch attempt of the Atlas was made at Cape Canaveral,
Florida, but the missile exploded shortly after takeoff at an altitude
of about 10,000 feet.
George Alexander, “Atlas Accuracy Improves as Test
Program is Completed,” Aviation Week and Space Technology, Feb.
25, 1963, p. 54.
June 20
Two NACA groups focused their efforts on the problems involved in
manned space flight. One group concerned themselves with performance of
aircraft at high speeds and altitudes and with rocket research; the
other group, with problems associated with hypersonic flight and
reentry.
Study, NACA Research into Space, Dec. 1957.
July (during the month)
A study was initiated by the Langley Aeronautical Laboratory on the use
of solid-fuel upper stages to achieve a payload orbit with as simple a
launch vehicle as possible. This was the beginning of the Scout
test-vehicle concept.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 87.
July—August
Alfred J. Eggers, Jr., of the NACA Ames Aeronautical Laboratory, worked
out a semiballistic design for a manned reentry spacecraft.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 87.
August 7
A Jupiter-C (test vehicle in the Jupiter missile development program),
with a scale-model nose cone, was fired 1,200 miles down the Atlantic
Missile Range. The nose cone, an ablative type, reached a peak altitude
of over 600 miles, and its recovery was one of the proving steps of the
ablative reentry principle. The nose cone was displayed by President
Eisenhower to a nation-wide television audience on November 7, 1957.
Army Capabilities in the Space Age, p. 26;
Grimwood, History of the Jupiter Missile System; Emme,
Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 87.
September 25
The second Atlas launch vehicle was destroyed in a launching attempt at
Cape Canaveral, Florida.
House Rpt. 67, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 32.
October 4
The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics launched Sputnik I, the first
artificial earth satellite. This event galvanized interest and action
on the part of the American public to support an active role in space
research, technology, and exploration.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 91; Senate Hearings, 86th Congress, 2nd Session, Missiles, Space,
and Other Major Defense Matters, Feb. 2-4, 8-9, March 16, 1960, p. 331.
Also at this time, many leaders, Dr. Wernher von Braun, for example,
made speeches on the “Impact of Sputnik” to American audiences anxious
to learn the meaning and to act to meet the requirements. For a concise
statement on the subject see Appendix C, “The Public Impact of Early
Satellite Launching” in Senate Rpt. 1014, Project Mercury:
Man-in-Space Program of the NASA, p. 71.
October 14
The American Rocket Society presented President Eisenhower with a
suggested program for outer space exploration. They proposed the
establishment of an Astronautical Research and Development Agency
similar to NACA and the Atomic Energy Commission. This agency would
have responsibility for all space projects except those directly
related to the military services. A list of proposed projects was
presented at an estimated cost of $100 million per annum.
House Rpt. 67, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 33.
October 15-21
A “Round 3” conference involving studies for a follow-on to the X-15
program, which subsequently led to the X-20 Dyna Soar, was held at the
Ames Aeronautical Laboratory. During the course of the meeting, Alfred
J. Eggers, Jr., of Ames advanced several proposals for possible manned
satellite vehicle development projects.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Background of Project Mercury Schedules, Aug. 14, 1960.
November 8
Secretary of Defense Neil McElroy directed the Army to proceed with the
launching of the Explorer earth satellites. This order, in effect,
resumed the Orbiter project that had been eliminated from the IGY
satellite planning program on September 9, 1955.
Akens, Origins of MSFC, p. 45.
November 12-13
At a meeting of the NACA Subcommittee on Fluid Mechanics, it was stated
that many aspects of space flight and astronautics would depend heavily
on research advances in the field that had been broadly termed fluid
mechanics. Research in this area involved internal and external gas
flows associated with high-speed flights within the atmosphere and
reentry into the atmosphere of spacecraft vehicles. The subcommittee
recommended to NACA that research in these matters be intensified.
Minutes of Meeting, NACA Committee on Aerodynamics,
Nov. 18-20, 1957, pp. 4-5.
November 19
Preston R. Bassett of the NACA Committee on Aerodynamics presented a
resolution urging NACA to adopt an aggressive program in space research
technology.
Minutes of Meeting, NACA Committee on Aircraft,
Missile and Spacecraft Aerodynamics, March 21, 1958, pp. 3-4.
November 21
The National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics established a Special
Committee on Space Technology to study and delineate problem areas that
must be solved to make space flight a practical reality and to consider
and recommend means for attacking these problems. Dr. H. Guyford Stever
of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology was named chairman.
Minutes of Meeting, NACA Committee on Aircraft,
Missile and Spacecraft Aerodynamics, March 21, 1958, pp. 3-4; Emme,
Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 92.
The Rocket and Satellite Research Panel recommended the creation of
a National Space Establishment in the Executive Branch of the
Government. According to the proposal, activities of this agency would
be under civilian leadership, and the organization would be charged
with formulating and supervising a space research program. An annual
budget of $1 billion for a period of 10 years was recommended.
House Rpt. 67, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 35. The
origin of this particular panel was in 1946, when the V-2 panel was
formed of representatives from interested agencies. During its tenure,
a total of 60 V-2's were fired. In 1948, the name was changed to Upper
Atmosphere Rocket Research Panel and, finally, in 1957 it was
redesignated Rocket and Satellite Research Panel.
November 21-22
Over one-half of the NACA Propulsion Conference was devoted to the
discussion of possible space propulsion systems. Three particular
systems appeared to afford excellent choices for such purposes. These
were: the chemical rocket, the nuclear rocket, and the nuclear-electric
rocket. It was the considered opinion of the conference members that
the chemical rocket would be quite adequate for a round trip to the
moon.
Study, NACA Research into Space, Dec. 1957.
November (during the month)
A presentation on manned orbital flight was made by Maxime A. Faget.
The concept included the use of existing ballistic missiles for
propulsion, solid-fuel retrorockets for reentry initiation, and a
nonlifting ballistic shape for the reentering capsule. This concept was
considered to be the quickest and safest approach for initial manned
flights into orbit.
Information supplied by Maxime A. Faget, July 9,
1963.
December 4
The American Rocket Society's proposal for an Astronautical Research
and Development Agency, formally presented to President Eisenhower on
October 14, 1957, was publicly announced.
House Rpt. 67, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 36.
December 5
An announcement was made that an Advanced Research Projects Agency
would be created in the Department of Defense to direct its space
projects.
House Rpt. 67, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 36.
December 6
IGY Vanguard (TV-3), the first with three live stages, failed to launch
a test satellite.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 92.
December 10
The Air Force created a Directorate of Astronautics to manage and
coordinate astronautical research programs, including work on
satellites and antimissile-missile weapons. Brigadier General Homer A.
Boushey was named to head the office. Later in the month the order was
rescinded by James H. Douglas, Secretary of the Air Force, who
considered the creation of such a group before the activation of the
Advanced Research Projects Agency to be premature.
House Rpt. 67, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 36.
January 4
The American Rocket Society and the Rocket and Satellite Research Panel
issued a summary of their proposals for a National Space Establishment.
The consensus was that the new agency should be independent of the
Department of Defense and not, in any event, under one of the military
services.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 94.
January 10
A successful limited flight was made by the fourth Atlas fired from
Cape Canaveral.
House Rpt. 67, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 36.
January 12
President Eisenhower, answering a December 10, 1957, letter from Soviet
Premier Nikolai A. Bulganin regarding a summit conference on
disarmament, proposed that Russia and the United States ”. . . agree
that outer space should be used for peaceful purposes.” This proposal
was compared dedicate atomic energy to peaceful uses, an offer which
The Soviets rejected.
House Document No. 71, 86th Congress, 1st Sess., p.
18; Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 94.
January 15
The Air Force received 11 unsolicited industry proposals for Project
7969, and technical evaluation was started. Observers from NACA
participated. (See March 1956 entry.)
“Outline of History of USAF Man-in-Space
RDProgram,” Missiles and Rockets, Vol. 10, No. 13 (March 26, 1962),
pp. 148-149.
January 16
A resolution was adopted by NACA stating that NACA had an important
responsibility for coordinating and conducting research in space
technology, either in its own laboratories or by contract. (See
November 19, 1957, entry.)
NACA Resolution on the Subject of Space Flight
adopted Jan. 16, 1958, contained in NACA Study, A Program for
Expansion of
NACA Research in Space Flight Technology with Estimates of Staff and
Facilities Required, Feb. 10, 1958.
Paul E. Purser and Maxime A. Faget conceived of a solid-fuel launch
vehicle design for the research and development phase of a manned
satellite vehicle project. This launch vehicle was later designated
Little Joe. When Project Mecury began in October 1958, the purposeof
the Little Joe phase was to propel a full-scale, full-weight
developmental version of the manned spacecraft to some of the flight
conditions that would be encountered during exit from the atmosphere on
an orbital mission. Also, Little Joe tests were used to perfect the
escape maneuver in the event of an aborted mission.
Letter, Space Task Group to AVCO-Everett Research
Laboratory (no subject), May 5, 1960.
January 29-31
A conference was held at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, to
review concepts for manned orbital vehicles. The NACA informally
presented two concepts then under study at Langley Aeronautical
Laboratory: the one proposed by Maxime A. Faget involved a ballistic,
high-drag capsule with heat shield on which the pilot lies prone during
reentry, with reentry being accomplished by reverse thrust at the
apogee of the elliptical orbit involving a deceleration load of about
8g, and proceeding to impact by a parachute landing; the other Langley
proposal called for the development of a triangular planform vehicle
with a flat bottom having some lift during reentry. At this same
meeting there were several Air Force contractor presentations. These
were as follows: Northrop, boost-glide buildup to orbital speed;
Martin, zero-lift vehicle launched by a Titan with controlled
flight estimated to be possible by mid-1961; McDonnell,
ballistic vehicle resembling Faget's proposal, weighing 2,400 pounds
and launched by an Atlas with a Polaris second stage; Lockheed,
a 20 degree semiapex angle cone with a hemispherical tip of 1-foot
radius, pilot in sitting position facing rearward, to be launched by an
Atlas-Hustler combination; Convair reviewed a previous proposal
for a large-scale manned space station, but stated a minimum vehicle—
a 1,000-pound sphere—could be launched by an Atlas within a year;
Aeronutronics, cone-shaped vehicle with spherical tip of 1-foot
radius, with man enclosed in sphere inside vehicle and rotated to line
the pilot up with accelerations, and launched by one of several
two-stage vehicles; Republic, the Ferri sled vehicle, a 4,000
pound, triangular plan with a two-foot diameter tube running continuous
around the leading and trailing edge and serving as a fuel tank for
final-stage, solid-propellant rockets located in each wing tip, with a
man in small compartment on top side, and with a heat-transfer ring in
the front of the nose for a glide reentry of 3,600 miles per hour with
pilot ejecting from capsule and parachuting down, and the launch
vehicle comprising three stages (also see July 31, 1958 entry); AVCO, a 1,500-pound vehicle sphere launched by a Titan, equipped with a
stainless-steel-cloth parachute whose diameter would be controlled by
compessed air bellows and which would orient the vehicle in orbit,
provide deceleration for reentry, and control drag during reentry;
Bell, reviewed proposals for boost-glide vehicles, but considered
briefly a minimum vehicle, spherical in shape, weighing about 3,000
pounds; Goodyear, a spherical vehicle with a rearward facing
tail cone and ablative surface, with flaps deflected from the cone
during reentry for increased drag and control, and launched by an Atlas
or a Titan plus a Vanguard second stage; North American, extend
the X-15 program by using the X-15 with a three-stage launch vehicle to
achieve a single orbit with an apogee of 400,000 feet and a perigee of
250,000, range about 500 to 600 miles and landing in the Gulf of
Mexico, and the pilot ejecting and landing by parachute with the
aircraft being lost.
Memo, Clarence A. Syvertson to Director, Langley
Aeronautical Laboratory, subject: Visit to WADC, Wright-Patterson AFB,
Ohio, to Attend Conference on January 29-31, 1958, Concerning Research
Problems Associated with Placing a Man in a Satellite Vehicle, Moffett
Field, Feb. 18, 1958.
January 31
An Army Jupiter-C missile boosted Explorer I, America's first
artificial earth satellite, into orbit. Other than the achievement of
orbital conditions, one of the more significant contributions of this
flight was the discovery of the Van Allen Radiation Belt, named for Dr.
James A. Van Allen, head of the physics department at the State
University of Iowa.
Akens, Origins of MSFC, p. 47.
Lieutenant General Donald Putt, Air Force Director of Research and
Development, sent a letter to Dr. Hugh Dryden, Director of NACA,
inviting NACA participation in the Air Force effort in the manned
ballistic rocket program. Dr. Dryden informed the Air Force that NACA
was preparing manned spacecraft designs for submission in March 1958.
Letter, Lt. Gen. D. L. Putt, DSC/Development, Hq.
USAF, to Dr. H. L. Dryden, Director, NACA, Jan. 31, 1958.
February 6
The Senate passed a resolution (S Res 256) creating a special Committee
on Space and Astronautics to frame legislation for a national program
for space exploration.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 95.
February 7
The Secretary of Defense issued a directive establishing the Advanced
Research Projects Agency, an organization under consideration since
November 15, 1957. It was to be a centralized group capable of handling
direction of both outer space and antimissile-missile projects, whose
duties in the space field were to bridge the gap until Congress could
consider legislative proposals for the establishment of a National
Space Agency.
House Rpt. 1228, 86th Cong., 2nd Sess., p. 3.
February 10
A study entitled, “A Program for Expansion of NACA Research Space
Flight Technology with Estimates of the Staff and Facilities Required"
was published by the NACA staff. The study pointed out the urgent need
for a rapid buildup of a national capability in space technology
leading to early flights of manned space vehicles. Besides devoting
some of its laboratory facilities, NACA would integrate into the
program the talent and competence of qualified scientific groups
outside its organization by a greatly expanded program of contracted
research. To support a program of this scope, NACA estimated an
additional annual budget of $100 million and 9,000 additional personnel
were required. It was also recommended that over the next five years
(1958—1962) $55 million be expended in new facility construction to
support space research projects. In regard to the contracted research
facet of the proposal, NACA estimated $10 million a year would be
needed at the outset of the program. Besides these recommendations,
NACA reviewed the following specific research projects for active
consideration: space propulsion systems for launching and flight;
materials and structures; space flight research involving launching,
rendezvous, reentry, recovery, flight simulation, navigation, guidance,
and control; space mechanics and communications; and space environment.
NACA Study, A Program for Expansion of NACA
Research in Space Flight Technology, Feb. 10, 1958.
February 13
The Special Committee on Space Technology, established by NACA on
November 21, 1957, to study and delineate problem areas that must be
resolved to make space flight a practical reality and to consider
recommended means for attacking these problems, met for the first time.
At the meeting the new committee established seven working groups: (1)
objectives, (2) vehicular program, (3) reentry, (4) range, launch, and
tracking facilities, (5) instrumentation, (6) space surveillance, and
(7) human factors and training. The objectives group was to draft a
complete national program for space research. Other than this specific
assignment, the remainder of the meeting was largely devoted to
organizing the working groups. These groups were to present their first
reports at the next meeting.
Minutes of Meeting, Committee on Aircraft, Missile
and Spacecraft Aerodynamics, Mar. 21, 1958, p. 5.
February 14
A report entitled, “Basic Objectives of a Continuing Program of
Scientific Research in Outer Space,” was presented by the IGY
Committee. The committee was of the opinion that the need for space
research would be required far past the close of the IGY in December
1958.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 95.
February 20
The name of the NACA Committee on Aerodynamics was changed to Committee
on Aircraft, Missile, and Spacecraft Aerodynamics to indicate clearly
the committee's cognizance over problems applicable to spacecraft and
missiles as well as aircraft. The Aerodynamics Committee had been
studying spacecraft research problems for the past 6 years.
Minutes of Meeting, Committee on Aircraft, Missile
and Spacecraft Aerodynamics, Mar. 21, 1958, p. 2.
February 27
Experience with the X-15 design indicated that many of the weight
figures advanced by the Langley Aeronautical Laboratory for the drag or
lift configurations of the reentry vehicle (later to become the Mercury
spacecraft) were too low, according to Walter C. Williams, Chief of the
NACA High-Speed Flight Station. Weights of auxiliary-power fuel,
research instrumentation, and cockpit equipment as set by Langley were
too low in terms of X-15 experience. Williams stated the total weight
should be 2,300 pounds for the drag configuration and 2,500 pounds for
the lifting configuration.
Letter, NACA Hq. to Langley, subject: Comments on
Suggested Ground Rules for Satellite Reentry Vehicles, Feb. 27, 1958.
March 10
Reports were made on recoverable manned satellite configurations being
considered by NACA. One involved a blunt, high-drag, zero-lift vehicle
that would depend on a parachute landing for final deceleration.
Another was a winged vehicle that would glide to a landing after
reentering the atmosphere. The third proposal involved features of each
of the above. Besides the configuration studies, significant reports
were completed relative to motion and heating, stabilization, and
attitude control.
Study, “Satellite and Spacecraft,” Current NACA
Aerodynamic Research Relating to Upper Atmosphere and Space Technology, Mar. 10, 1958, p. 15.
March 10-12
A working conference in support of the Air Force “Man-in-Space Soonest"
(MISS) was held at the Air Force Ballistic Missile Division in Los
Angeles, California. General Bernard Schriever, opening the conference,
stated that events were moving faster than expected. By this statement
he meant that Roy Johnson, the new head of the Advanced Research
Projects Agency, had asked the Air Force to report to him on its
approach to putting a man in space soonest. Johnson indicated that the
Air Force would be assigned the task, and the purpose of the conference
was to produce a rough-draft proposal. At that time the Air Force
concept consisted of three stages: a high-drag, no-lift, blunt-shaped
spacecraft to get man in space soonest, with landing to be accomplished
by a parachute; a more sophisticated approach by possibly employing a
lifting vehicle or one with a modified drag; and a long-range program
that might end in a space station or a trip to the moon.
Memo, Lawrence A. Clousing to Director, Ames
Aeronautical Laboratory, subject: Working Conference for the Air Force
“Man in Space Soonest” Program, held Mar. 10-12, 1958, at the Air Force
Ballistic Missile Division Offices, Los Angeles, Mar. 24, 1958.
March 12
The NACA staff completed a program outline for conducting the manned
satellite program. At that time, NACA was already actively engaged in
research and study of several phases. For example, in the basic studies
category effort had been expended on the study of orbits and orbit
control, space physical characteristics, configuration studies,
propulsion system research, human factors, structures and materials,
satellite instrumentation, range requirements, and noise and vibration
during reentry and exit. In addition, NACA outlined the complete
program covering full-scale studies of mockups, simulators, and detail
designs; full-scale vertical and orbiting flights involving unmanned,
animal, and manned flights and recovery; and exploitation of the
program to increase the payloads. As to the design concepts for such a
program, NACA believed that the Atlas launch vehicle was adequate to
meet launch-vehicle requirements for manned orbital flights; that
retrograde and vernier controllable thrust could be used for orbital
control; that heat-sink or lighter material could be used against
reentry heating; that guidance should be ground programed with
provisions for the pilot to make final adjustments; that recovery
should be accomplished at sea with parachutes used for letdown; that a
network of radar stations should be established to furnish continuous
tracking; and that launchings be made from Cape Canaveral. It was
estimated that with a simple ballistic shape accelerations would be
within tolerable limits for the pilot. Temperature control, oxygen
supply, noise, and vibration were considered engineering development
problems, which could be solved without any special breakthroughs.
Outline, Manned Satellite Program, prepared by
NACA Staff, Mar. 12, 1958.
March 17
The NACA Special Committee on Space Technology held its second meeting
at the Ames Aeronautical Laboratory, and preliminary reports were
presented by the committee working groups on objectives and vehicular
programs. The committee as a whole was briefed on the work that had
been accomplished by the former NACA Committee on Aerodynamics over the
past 6 years. It was stated that between 1952 and 1956, approximately
10 percent of NACA's research efforts were applicable directly or
indirectly to astronautics. In 1957, the percentage of space flight
research rose to 23; and at the time of the meeting, 30 percent of the
aerodynamic effort and 20 percent of propulsion research was applicable
to astronautics problems. The committee also heard special papers on
research being conducted in fluid mechanics, satellite studies,
spacecraft design proposals, boost-glide and hypersonic vehicle
studies, and missiles.
Minutes of Meeting, Committee on Aircraft, Missile
and Spacecraft Aerodynamics, March 21, 1958, p. 6.
March 18
An NACA report was published entitled, “Preliminary Studies of Manned
Satellites, Wingless Configuration, Non-Lifting,” by Maxime A. Faget,
Benjamine Garland, and James J. Buglia. Later this document became the
basic working paper for the Project Mercury development program, and
was reissued as NASA Technical Note D-1254, March 1962.
Maxime A. Faget, et al, Preliminary Studies of
Manned Satellites, Wingless Configuration, Non-Lifting, Langley
Aeronautical Laboratory, March 18, 1958.
March 18-20
An “NACA Conference on High-Speed Aerodynamics” was held at the Ames
Aeronautical Laboratory, Moffett Field, California, to acquaint the
military services and industrial contractors interested in aerospace
projects with the results of recent research conducted by the NACA
laboratories on the subject of space flight. The conference was
attended by more than 500 representatives from the NACA, industry, the
military services, and other appropriate government agencies. Some 46
technical papers were presented by NACA personnel, and included
specific proposals for manned space flight vehicle projects. One of
these was presented by Maxime A. Faget. (See March 18, 1958, entry.)
Other papers within the category of manned orbital satellites included:
“Preliminary Studies of Manned Satellites, Wingless Configuration,
Lifting Body” by Thomas J. Wong and others; “Preliminary Studies of
Manned Satellites, Winged Configurations” by John V. Becker;
“Preliminary Aerodynamic Data Pertinent to Manned Satellite Reentry
Configurations” by Jim A. Penland and William O. Armstrong; and
“Structural Design Considerations for Boost-Glide and Orbital Reentry
Vehicles” by William A. Brooks and others.
Papers compiled and presented at NACA Conference
on High-Speed Aerodynamics, Ames Aeronautical Laboratory, Moffett
Field, Calif., March 18-20, 1958, pp. ix-xxi, 19-87.
March (during the month)
At the Langley Aeronautical Laboratory, a working committee studied
various manned satellite development plans and concluded that a
ballistic-entry vehicle launched with an existing intercontinental
ballistic missile propulsion system could be utilized fpr the first
manned satellite project.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Background of Project Mercury Schedules, Aug. 14, 1960.
Robert R. Gilruth, Clotaire Wood, and Hartley A. Soule of NACA
transmitted a document to the Air Research and Development Command,
which listed the design concepts NACA believed should be followed to
achieve manned orbital flights at the earliest possible date. These
were: (1) design and develop a simple ballistic vehicle, (2) use
existing intercontinental ballistic missile propulsion systems, and (3)
use the heat sink method for reentry from orbital conditions.
Memo, Clotaire Wood to Space Flight Development,
subject: “Background on WADC Letter to NASA of October 22, 1958,
covering Ablation/Heat Sink Investigation—Manned Reentry,” Nov. 7,
1958.
April 2
President Eisenhower submitted to Congress a special message calling
for the creation of a special civilian space agency, with NACA serving
as a nucleus, to conduct federal aeronautic and space activities.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Background of Project Mercury Schedules, Aug. 14, 1960.
April (during the month)
Maxime A. Faget and associates conceived the idea of using a contour
couch to withstand the high g-loads attendant to acceleration and
reentry forces of manned space flight. Fabrication of test-model
contour couches was started in the Langley shops in May 1958, and the
concept was proved feasible on July 30 (see entry) of that same year.
Information supplied by Jack C. Heberlig, Engineering
and Development, Manned Spacecraft Center, May 23, 1963.
June 5
After serving as a liaison officer of NACA and as a participating
member of an Advanced Research Projects Agency panel, Maxime A. Faget
reported to Dr. Hugh Dryden on resulting studies and attending
recommendations on the subject of manned space flight. He stated that
the Advanced Research Projects Agency panel was quite aware that the
responsibility for such a program might be placed with the
soon-to-be-created civilian space agency, although they recommended
program management be placed with the Air Force under executive control
of NACA and the Advanced Research Projects Agency. The panel also
recommended that the program start immediately even though the specific
manager was, as yet, unassigned. Several of the proposals put forth by
the panel on the proposed development were rather similar to the
subsequent evolvement. The system suggested by the Advanced Research
Projects Agency was to be based on the use of the Atlas launch vehicle
with the Atlas-Sentry system serving as backup; retrorockets were to be
used to initiate the return from orbit; the spacecraft was to be
nonlifting, ballistic type, and the crew was to be selected from
qualified volunteers in the Army, Navy, and Air Force.
Memo, Maxime A. Faget to Dr. Dryden, Director, NACA,
June 5, 1958.
June 22
NACA personnel discussed the proposed space agency budget, including
the manned satellite project, with Bureau of Budget officials.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Background of Project Mercury Schedules, Aug. 14, 1960.
June 26
Meetings were held with NACA, AVCO, and Lockheed representatives in
attendance to consider materials for thermal protection of satellite
reentry vehicles.
Memo, H. M. Henneberry and G. C. Deutsch to Associate
Director, NASA-Langley, subject: Discussions with AVCO and Lockheed
Representatives Concerning Materials for Thermal Protection of
Satellite Reentry Vehicles, Washington D.C., June 26-27, 1958, Sept. 8,
1958.
June (during the month)
Preliminary specifications of the first manned satellite vehicle were
drafted by Langley Aeronautical Laboratory personnel under the
supervision of Maxime Faget and Charles W. Mathews. After a number of
revisions and additions, these specifications were used for the Project
Mercury spacecraft contract with McDonnell Aircraft Corporation. A
working group of representatives from the Langley Aeronautical
Laboratory and the Lewis Flight Propulsion Laboratory was formed for
the purpose of outlining a manned satellite program.
Information supplied by Maxime A. Faget, July 9,
1963.
NACA representatives were assigned to the Advanced Research Projects
Agency, Manned Satellite Committee.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Background of Project Mercury Schedules, Aug. 14, 1960.
July 9
General Electric Company personnel presented a briefing at NACA
headquarters on studies related to manned space flight. The company
held contracts let by the Wright Air Development Center for study and
mock-up of a manned spacecraft. NACA made no official comment.
Memo for Files, Hugh Henneberry, NACA Space Flight
Office, subject: Briefing by General Electric Representatives on
Studies Related to Man-in-Space Program, July 17, 1958.
July 15
Cook Electric Company submitted a proposal to the McDonnell Aircraft
Corporation as a part of a preliminary study and design effort by
McDonnell for a manned satellite. McDonnell, prior to being awarded the
Mercury prime development contract in February 1959, spent 11 months
under a company research budget working on a manned orbital spacecraft
concept.
Chronological statement filed by Cook Electric
Company with NASA Hq., March 3, 1959.
July 16
Congress passed the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958.
Public Law 85-568, 85th Congress, H.R. 12575,
subject: National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958, July 29, 1958.
July 18
In a memorandum to Dr. James R. Killian, Jr., Special Assistant to the
President for Science and Technology, Dr. Hugh L. Dryden, Director of
NACA, pointed out that NASA would inherit from NACA a rich technical
background, competence, and leadership in driving toward the objective
of a manned satellite program. For years NACA groups had been involved
in research on such items as stabilization of ultra-high speed
vehicles, provision of suitable controls, high temperature structural
designs, and all the problems of reentry. In fact, a part of this work
had been directed specifically toward the problem of designing a manned
satellite. Also, the X-15 program had provided much experience in human
factors applicable to the orbital flight of man. Therefore, Dr. Dryden
concluded, in consonance with the intent of the Space Act of 1958, the
assignment of the program to the NACA would be consistent.
Memo, Dr. H. L. Dryden, Director, NACA, to Dr. J. R.
Killian, Jr., subject: Manned Satellite Program, July 18, 1958.
July 29
The National Aeronautic and Space Act of 1958 was signed into a law by
President Eisenhower.
Public Law 85-568, 85th Congress, H.R. 12575,
subject: National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958, July 29, 1958.
July 30
By using the development model of the Mercury contour couch designed by
Maxime A. Faget and associates, Carter C. Collins withstood a 20g load
on the centrifuge at Johnsville, Pennsylvania. This test proved that
the reentry accelerations of manned space flight could be withstood.
Information supplied by Maxime A Faget, Assistant
Director for Engineering and Development, MSC.
July 31
Republic Aviation representatives briefed NACA Headquarters personnel
on the man-in-space studies in which the company had been engaged since
the first of the year. They envisioned a four-stage solid launch
vehicle system and a lifting reentry vehicle, which was termed a sled.
The vehicle was to be of triangular shape with a 75 degree leading-edge
sweep. Aerodynamic and reaction controls would be available to the
pilot. For the launch vehicle, Republic proposed a Minuteman first
stage, a Polaris first stage, a Minuteman upper stage, and a Jumbo
rocket fourth stage. Other details relative to reentry and recovery
were included in the briefing.
Memo, Hugh M. Henneberry, NACA Lewis, to the files,
subject: Briefing by Republic Aviation Representatives on Man-in-Space
Studies, Aug. 5, 1958.
July (during the month)
The initial concept of the use of a tractor rocket for an escape device
was suggested by Maxime A. Faget—an idea which developed into the
Mercury escape rocket. (see fig. 1.)
Information supplied by Maxime A. Faget, July 9,
1963.
 |
Figure 1. Closeup view
of Recruit escape rocket and full-scale spacecraft. |
August 1
Dr. Hugh L. Dryden, NACA Director, presented a program on the
technology of manned space flight vehicles to the Select Committees of
Congress on Astronautics and Space Exploration.
House Report No. 671, Project Mercury, Second
Interim Report, 87th Congress, 1st Session (June 29, 1961), p. 8.
August 8
A memorandum from the Secretary of the Army to the Secretary of Defense
recommended Project Adam for a manned space flight program. This plan
proposed a ballistic suborbital flight using existing Redstone hardware
as a national political-psychological demonstration. This memo proposed
that funds in the amount of $9 million and $2.5 million for fiscal
years 1959 and 1960, respectively, be approved for program execution.
House Rpt. 1228, 86th Cong., 2nd Sess., p. 3; David
S. Akens, History of Marshall Space Flight Center, July 1-Dec. 31,
1960, Appendix B, “Mercury-Redstone Chronology,” p. 3. Hereinafter
cited as Akens, History of MSFC, Mercury-Redstone Chronology.
August (during the month)
President Eisenhower assigned the responsibility for the development
and execution of a manned space flight program to the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration. However, NASA did not become
operational until October 1, 1958.
House Rpt. 671, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 8.
September 11
At an Army Advanced Research Projects Agency conference, the Army was
advised there was little chance for approval of Project Adam.
Akens, History of MSFC, Mercury-Redstone
Chronology, p. 4.
September 17
A joint National Aeronautics and Space Administration/Advanced Research
Projects Agency Manned Satellite Panel was formed. This panel, with the
aid of technical studies prepared by the Langley and Lewis Research
Centers and assistance from the military services, drafted specific
plans for a program of research leading to manned space flight.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 102.
September 25
Dr. T. Keith Glennan, NASA Administrator, announced publicly that NASA
would be activated on October 1, 1958.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915—1960, p. 102.
September (during the month)
Study was started on the tracking and ground instrumentation networks
for the manned satellite project.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 1 for Period Ending January 31, 1959.
September 24-October 1
A series of meetings were held in Washington, with Robert R. Gilruth
serving as chairman to draft a manned satellite program and provide a
basic plan for meeting the objectives of this program. Others attending
included S. B. Batdorf, A. J. Eggers, Maxime A. Faget, George Low,
Warren North, Walter C. Williams, and Robert C. Youngquist.
NASA Minutes of Meeting, subject: Panel for Manned
Space Flight, Sept. 24, 30 and Oct. 1, 1959.
October 1
NASA was activated in accordance with the terms of Public Law 85-568,
and the nonmilitary space projects which had been conducted by the
Advanced Research Projects Agency were transferred to the jurisdiction
of the NASA. Concurrently, NACA, after a 43-year tenure, was
inactivated, and its facilities and personnel became a part of NASA.
House Rpt. 67, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 57.
1958 (during the year)
The Navy space proposal to the Advanced Research Projects Agency,
during the tenure of that organization's interim surveillance over
national space projects, was known as Project Mer. This plan involved
sending a man into orbit in a collapsible pneumatic glider. The glider
and its occupant would be launched in the nose of a giant launch
vehicle. After the glider had been placed in orbit, it would be
inflated, and then flown down to a water landing.
House Rpt. 1228, 86th Cong., 2nd Sess., p. 4.
October 3-7
Studies and plans of the manned satellite project were presented to
Advanced Research Projects Agency on October 3 and to Dr. T. Keith
Glennan, NASA Administrator, on October 7. On October 7, 1958, Dr.
Glennan approved the project by saying, in effect, “Let's get on with
it.” (See fig. 2)
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Background of Project Mercury Schedules, Aug. 14, 1960.
 |
Figure 2. Mercury
spacecraft in orbit: Artist's conception. |
October 6
Personnel from the Langley Research Center visited the Army Ballistic
Missile Agency to open negotiations for procuring Redstone and Jupiter
launch vehicles for manned satellite projects.
Memo, Space Task Group to NASA Hq., subject:
Transmittal of Comments on AOMC Memorandum for Record—Meeting of NASA
and AOMC, Oct. 6, 1958, Nov. 13, 1958, with inclosures.
October 7-8
Personnel from the Space Task Group involved in the study of reentry
methods visited the Air Force Wright Air Development Center, Dayton,
Ohio, for the purpose of preparing test specimens. Along with
individuals from the center and the Air Force Ballistic Missile
Division, the group then met at the Chicago Midway Laboratories,
Chicago, Illinois, to investigate various ablation methods of reentry.
Concurrently, these same methods were being investigated at
high-temperature test facilities at Langley.
Letter, Wright Air Development Center to Air Research
and Development Command, subject: Ablation/Heat Sink Investigation—
Manned Reentry, Oct. 21, 1958.
October 9
In behalf of the manned satellite project, an air drop program for
full-scale parachute and landing system development was started at
Langley.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 1 for Period ending January 31, 1959, March 1959.
October 14
The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Supply and Logistics invited the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration to submit nominations for
materiel procurement urgency (commonly known as the DX priority
rating).
Notes, Assistant to Deputy Administrator to NASA
Administrator, subject: Briefing Memorandum for the Administrator,
March 12, 1959.
October 17-18
Langley Research Center personnel visited the Air Force Ballistic
Missile Division, Inglewood, California, to open negotiations for
procuring Atlas launch vehicles for the manned satellite project.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Background of Project Mercury Schedules, Aug. 14, 1960.
October 21
A bidders' briefing for the Little Joe launch vehicle was held. As
earlier mentioned, this launch vehicle was to be used in the
development phase of the manned satellite project. (See January 16,
1958, entry). The Little Joe launch vehicle was 48 feet in height,
weighed (at maximum) 41,330 pounds, was 6.66 feet in diameter,
consisted of four Pollux and four Recruit clustered, solid-fuel
rockets, could develop a thrust of 250,000 pounds, and could lift a
maximum payload of 3,942 pounds. (See fig. 3.)
Letter, Space Task Group to AVCO-Everett Research
Laboratory, (no subject), May 5, 1960.
 |
Figure 3. Little Joe on
launcher at Wallops during checkout. |
October 23
Preliminary specifications for a manned spacecraft were established to
industry. These specifications outlined the program and suggested
methods of analysis and construction.
Memo, George Low, NASA, for the House Committee on
Space and Astronautics, subject: NASA Procedure Used in the Selection
of McDonnell Corporation for the Construction of the Project Mercury
Capsule, April 24, 1959.
October 27
A special Committee on Life Sciences was established at Langley to
determine qualifications and attributes required of personnel to be
selected for America's first manned space flight and to give advice on
other human aspects of the manned satellite program.
Letter, Charles J. Donlan, Associate Director, STG,
to Willson H. Hunter, NASA Headquarters, subject: Transmittal of
Materials Requested by Willson H. Hunter, Dec. 16, 1960. This letter
outlines the overall sequence of events in the astronaut selection
program.
October (during the month)
Drop tests of full-scale capsules from a C-130 airplane were started to
check parachute deployment and spacecraft stability. Preliminary drops
of the parachute system were made from a NASA helicopter at West Point,
Virginia. These drops involved the use of a concrete-filled drum
attached to an operating canister system. The purpose of this phase was
to demonstrate the adequacy of the mechanical system of deploying the
parachutes. Subsequently, the drops were made by the C-130's at Pope
Field, North Carolina, from low levels to perfect a means of extracting
the spacecraft from the aircraft. Full-scale spacecraft and operating
parachutes were used in these drops, and all operational features of
the drop-test program were worked out. The next phase was the research
and development drops offshore of Wallops Island, Virginia, and the
objectives here were as follows: to study the stability of the
spacecraft during free fall and with parachute support; to study the
shock input to the spacecraft by parachute deployment; and to study and
develop retrieving operations.
Memo, George M. Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status of Manned Satellite Project, November 25, 1958.
Design work was started on the Little Joe vehicles and test model
spacecraft.
Memo, George M. Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status of Manned Satellite Project, November 25, 1958.
Dr. W. Randolph Lovelace II was appointed by NASA Headquarters as
Chairman of a Special Committee on Life Sciences by T. Keith Glennan,
the NASA Administrator. After prospective astronaut candidates were
interviewed in Washington, D. C., those chosen for further
consideration received medical examinations at the Lovelace Clinic in
Albuquerque, New Mexico (see Feb. 1-14, 1959, entry).
House Document No. 454, 86th Cong., 2nd Sess.,
subject: Third Semiannual Report of the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Message from the President of the United States, Aug.
30, 1960.
November 3
The initial contingent of military service aeromedical personnel
reported for duty and began working on human factors, crew selection,
and crew training plans for the manned spacecraft program.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 1, for Period Ending January 31, 1959.
November 5
The Space Task Group, unofficially established on October 8, 1958, was
officially formed at Langley Field, Virginia, to implement a manned
satellite project. Robert R. Gilruth and Charles J. Donlan were
appointed as Project Manager and Assistant Project Manager,
respectively. The memorandum of establishment listed a total of 35
people from Langley assigned to the Space Task Group. The following
personnel were transferred from the Langley Research Center to the
newly established Space Task Group: *Robert R. Gilruth, Charles J.
Donlan, *Paul E. Purser, *Maxime A. Faget, Charles H. Zimmerman,
*William M. Bland, *Aleck C. Bond, Alan B. Kehlet, *Charles W. Mathews,
*Edison M. Fields, *Robert G. Chilton, *Jerome B. Hammack, *Jack C.
Heberlig, *Claiborne R. Hicks, Ronald Kolenkiewicz, *Christopher C.
Kraft, *Howard C. Kyle, *William T. Lauten, *John B. Lee, *George F.
MacDougall, *John P. Mayer, *William C. Muhley, *Herbert G. Patterson,
Harry H. Ricker, Frank C. Robert, Joseph J. Rollins, Ronelda F. Sartor,
Paul D. Taylor, Shirley J. Hartley, Norma L. Livesay, Betsy F. Magin,
Jacquelyn B. Stearn, *Julia R. Watkins, *Nancy C. Lowe, and Shirley P.
Watkins. ( * Assigned to Manned Spacecraft Center as of November 1962).
Personnel detailed from the Lewis Research Center to the Space Task
Group and Project Mercury were as follows: E. H. Buller, A. M. Busch,
W. R. Dennis, M. J. Krasnican, *Glynn S. Lunney, *Andre J. Meyer, W. R.
Meyer, W. J. Nesbitt, *Gerald J. Pesman, and Leonard Rabb. Individuals
from Lewis remained on a detailed status until 1959 when they were
permanently reassigned to the Space Task Group. The 45 people listed
above were the embryo work force of Project Mercury.
As a note of interest, on the fourth anniversary of the activation
document, 21 of the original Langley reassignees and 3 of the Lewis
group were members of the Manned Spacecraft Center, the successor of
the Space Task Group.
Memo, Floyd L. Thompson, Acting Director, NASA
Langley to all concerned, subject: Space Task Group, Nov. 5, 1958;
information supplied by Lynn Manley, Lewis Research Center, May 28,
1963.
November 7
A contractor briefing, attended by some 40 prospective bidders on the
manned spacecraft, was held at the Langley Research Center. More
detailed specifications were then prepared and distributed to about 20
manufacturers who had stated an intention to bid on the project.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 1, Manned Satellite Project, Dec. 9, 1958; Agenda for
Prospective Bidders for Manned Satellite Capsule, prepared by Space
Task Group for Nov. 7, 1958.
November 14
Specifications for the manned spacecraft (Specification Number S-6)
were issued, and final copies were mailed on November 17, 1958, to 20
firms which had indicated a desire to be considered as bidders.
Memo, Abe Silverstein to NASA Administrator, subject:
Schedule for Evaluation and Contractual Negotiations for Manned
Satellite Capsule, Dec. 24, 1958; NASA-Langley, subject: Specifications
for Manned Space Capsule, Nov. 14, 1958.
The highest national procurement priority rating (DX) was requested
for the manned spacecraft project.
Letter, Hugh L. Dryden to Robert R. Gilruth, (no
subject), March 23, 1959.
Twenty firms notified the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration of their intention to prepare proposals for the
development of the manned spacecraft. NASA set the deadline for
proposal submission as December 11, 1958.
Memo, George M. Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 1, Manned Satellite Project, Dec. 9, 1958; Memo,
Robert R. Gilruth to all Space Task Group Personnel, subject: Prime
Bidders for Manned Satellite Capsule, Nov. 19, 1958.
November 20
The three military services were invited to send one man each to the
Space Task Group tp perform liaison duties for the manned spacecraft
project. These posts were filled in January 1959 by Lt. Colonel Martin
Raines, Army; Lt. Colonel Keith Lindell, Air Force; and Commander Paul
Havenstein, Navy.
Memo, George M. Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 2, Manned Satellite Project, Dec. 17, 1958.
November 24
The Space Task Group placed an order for one Atlas launch vehicle with
the Air Force Missile Division, Inglewood, California, as part of a
preliminary research program leading to manned space flight. The
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Headquarters requested
that the Air Force construct and launch one Atlas C launch vehicle to
check the aerodynamics of the spacecraft. It was the intention to
launch this missile about May 1959 in a ballistic trajectory. This was
to be the launch vehicle for the Big Joe reentry test shot, but plans
were later changed and an Atlas Model D launch vehicle was used
instead.
Message, NASA NDA, Ralph Cushman, Contracting
Officer, NASA, to Commanding General, Air Force Ballistic Missile
Division, Nov. 24, 1958.
November 26
The manned satellite program was officially designated Project Mercury.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915-1960,
p. 104.
Space Task Group personnel presented a proposed program for Langley
Research Center support in the Little Joe phase of Project Mercury.
Langley was favorably inclined, and after a survey of manpower and
facility availability, notified Space Task Group on December 5, 1958,
of its willingness to support the program. Langley tasks involved
contracting for engineering, construction, services, data processing,
analysis, and reporting research results.
Memo, Carl A. Sandahl for Associate Director, NASA
Langley, subject: NASA Participation in Little Joe Project, Dec. 9,
1958.
November 28
Less than 18 months after the first flight, an Atlas launch vehicle was
launched 6,300 miles down range from Cape Canaveral, Florida.
House Rpt. 67, 87th Cong. 1st Sess., March 8, 1961.
November (during the month)
A scale model of the Mercury spacecraft (without escape tower),
oriented for the reentry phase, was tested at transonic Mach numbers in
a 1-foot transonic test tunnel at the Arnold Engineering Development
Center, Tullahoma, Tennessee.
Notes supplied by Marvin E. Hintz, Historical Office,
Arnold Engineering Development Center, Tullahoma, Tenn.
November-December
Study was started on spacecraft recovery operations. During this study
period, it was learned that the retrieving operation could be very
difficult; but with properly designed equipment, helicopter pickup
could be used and appeared to be the most favorable method.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Background of Project Mercury Schedules, Aug. 14, 1960.
December 1
Design of the Big Joe spacecraft for the Project Mercury reentry test
(the spacecraft would be boosted by an Atlas launch vehicle over a
ballistic trajectory) was accomplished by the Space Task Group.
Construction of the spacecraft was assigned as a joint task of the
Langley and Lewis Research Centers under the direction of the Space
Task Group. The instrument package was developed by Lewis personnel
assigned to the Space Task Group, and these individuals later became
the nucleus of the Space Task Group's Flight Operations Division at
Cape Canaveral.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Background of Project Mercury Schedules, August 14, 1960; information
supplied by Aleck Bond, Manned Spacecraft Center, June 11, 1963.
December 2
Space Task Group officials visited the Army Ballistic Missile Agency to
determine the feasibility of using the Jupiter launch vehicle for the
intermediate phase of Project Mercury, to discuss the Redstone program,
and to discuss the cost for Redstone and Jupiter launch vehicles.
Memo, Warren J. North to Assistant Director for
Advanced Technology, subject: Visit to ABMA Regarding Boosters for
Manned Satellite and Juno II Programs, Dec. 4, 1958.
December 8
The Space Task Group indicated that nine Atlas launch vehicles were
required in support of the Project Mercury manned and unmanned flights
and these were ordered from the Air Force Ballistic Missile Division.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Background of Project Mercury Schedules, Aug. 14, 1960.
December 9
An aeromedical selection team composed of Major Stanley C. White, Air
Force; Lt. Robert B. Voas, Navy; and Captain William Augerson, Army,
drafted a tentative astronaut selection procedure. According to the
plan, representatives from the services and industry would nominate 150
men by January 21, 1959; 36 of these would be selected for further
testing which would reduce the group to 12; and in a 9-month training
period, a hard core of 6 men would remain. At the end of December 1958,
this plan was rejected.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 1, Manned Satellite Project, Dec. 9, 1958; Memo,
George Low to NASA Administrator, subject: Status Report No. 3, Project
Mercury, Dec. 27, 1958.
December 10
The Space Task Group appointed a Technical Assessment Committee, with
Charles H. Zimmerman serving as chairman, to assist the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration Source Selection Board. This group
provided the board with technical ratings on contractor proposals.
Technical specialists throughout the Space Task Group supplied specific
component assessment information to the committee.
Memo, Robert R. Gilruth, subject: Procedures for
Technical Assessment of Manufacturer's Proposals for a Manned Space
Capsule Submitted in Response to Requests for Proposals on
Specification S-6, Nov. 14, 1958, Dec. 10, 1958.
December 11
The Lewis Research Center presented its funding requirements for the
attitude control and instrumentation systems for the Big Joe flight
test spacecraft. Confirmation of agreements and fund transfer were
forwarded by the Space Task Group to Lewis on February 17, 1959.
Memo, Space Task Group to NASA Headquarters, subject:
Request for Transfer of Space Research and Development Funds to Lewis
for Manned Space Capsule Instrumentation, Dec. 24, 1958.
Eleven firms submitted proposals for the development of a manned
spacecraft. These were AVCO, Chance-Vought, Convair, Douglas, Grumman,
Lockheed, Martin, McDonnell, North American, Northrop, and Republic. In
addition, Winzen Research Laboratories submitted an incomplete
proposal.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 2, Manned Satellite Project, Dec. 17, 1958.
December 12
Robert R. Gilruth, Mercury Project Manager, requested that the Lewis
Flight Research Branch provide technical support for Project Mercury.
The Space Task Group was particularly interested in Lewis'
instrumentation facilities for use in research and development tests of
Big Joe.
Memo, G. Merritt Preston, Chief, Flight Problems
Branch Lewis Research Center, to Dr. Abe Silverstein, NASA Hq.,
subject: Distribution of Lewis Flying Research Personnel Space
Activities, Dec. 12, 1958.
Space Task Group personnel began technical assessment of manned
spacecraft development proposals submitted by industry. Charles
Zimmermann headed the technical assessment team.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 1, Manned Satellite Project, Dec. 9, 1958.
Space Task Group received a “Development and Funding Plan” from the
Army Ordnance Missile Command in support of Project Mercury.
December 13
Gordo, a primate, was launched into space aboard an Army Jupiter
missile nose cone. Although nose cone recovery efforts failed because
the float mechanism attached to the nose cone did not function,
telemetry data provided useful biomedical information and disclosed
that the Navy-trained squirrel monkey had withstood the space flight
and reentry phase without any adverse physiological effects. Gordo was
in a weightless state for 8.3 minutes, he experienced a 10g pressure in
takeoff, and a 40g pressure upon reentry at 10,000 miles per hour.
Akens, Origins of MSFC, Dec. 1960; House Rpt.
67, 87th Cong., 1st Sess., Mar. 8, 1961.
December 17
Dr. T. Keith Glennan referred to the manned satellite project as
Project Mercury in a policy speech for the first time.
Memo, George Low to Dr. Silverstein, NASA Hq.,
subject: Change of Manned Satellite Name from “Project Mercury” to
“Project Astronaut,” Dec. 12, 1958.
December 29
A contract was awarded to North American Aviation for design and
construction of the Little Joe air frame.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 4, Project Mercury, Jan. 12, 1959.
December 30
Space Task Group's technical assessment teams completed the evaluation
of industry proposals for design and construction of a manned
spacecraft and forwarded their findings to the Source Selection Board,
NASA Headquarters.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Background of Project Mercury Schedules, August 14, 1960.
December 31
The letter-of-intent was placed with North American Aviation for the
fabrication of the Little Joe Test vehicle air frame. Delivery of the
air frames for flight testing was scheduled to occur every three weeks
beginning in June 1959. Space Task Group had ordered all the major
rocket motors, which were scheduled for delivery well ahead of the
Little Joe flight test schedule. The spacecraft for this phase of the
program was being designed and construction would start shortly. Thus
the Little Joe program should meet its intended flight test schedule.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 1 for Period Ending January 31, 1959, March 1959.
December (during the month)
A draft checklist entitled “Overall Technical Assessment of Proposals
for Manned Space Capsule,” was prepared by the Space Task Group for use
by the Source Selection Board.
January 5
Qualifications were established for pilot selection in a meeting at the
NASA Headquarters. These qualifications were as follows: age, less than
40; height, less than 5 feet 11 inches; excellent physical condition;
bachelor's degree or equivalent; graduate of test pilot school; 1,500
hours flight time; and a qualified jet pilot.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 6, Project Mercury, Feb. 3, 1959.
January 6
A meeting was held at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Headquarters to discuss the method for spacecraft heat protection. Two
plans were considered: beryllium heat sink and ablation. Based on this
meeting a decision was made to modify the spacecraft structure in order
to accomodate interchangeably ablation heat shields and beryllium heat
sinks , and orders were placed for 12 and 6, respectively. The material
chosen for the ablation heat was Fiberglas bonded with a modified
phenolic resin. This material was found to have good structural
properties even after being subjected to reentry heating.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 4, Project Mercury, Jan. 12, 1959.
January 9
The Source Selection Board at NASA Headquarters composed of Abe
Silverstein, Ralph Cushman, George Low, Walter Schier, DeMarquis Wyatt,
and Charles Zimmerman, completed their findings and reported to Dr. T.
Keith Glennan, the Administrator. McDonnell Aircraft Corporation was
selected as the prime contractor to develop and produce the Mercury
spacecraft.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 4, Project Mercury, Jan. 12, 1959.
Representatives of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
and the Department of Defense met to coordinate requirements of the two
agencies and arrived at an agreement for a “National Program to Meet
Satellite and Space Vehicle Tracking Requirements for FY59 and FY60.”
This meeting led to the formation of a continuing NASA-DOD Space Flight
Tracking Resources Committee.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915-1960,
p. 106.
January 14
Preliminary negotiations were started with McDonnell on the technical
and legal aspects of the Mercury spacecraft research and development
program.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 5, Project Mercury, Jan. 20, 1959.
January 16
NASA requested the Army Ordnance Missile Command, Huntsville, Alabama,
to construct and launch eight Redstone launch vehicles and two Jupiter
launch vehicles in support of Project Mercury manned and unmanned
flights.
Message, NASA Hq. to Commanding General, Army
Ordnance Missile Command, Jan. 16, 1959.
During a meeting of the Space Task Group, it was decided to
negotiate with McDonnell for design of spacecraft that could be fitted
with either a beryllium heat sink or an ablation heat shield. Robert R.
Gilruth, the project director, considered that for safety purposes,
both should be used. He also felt that the recovery landing bag should
be replaced by a honeycombed crushable structure. At this same meeting,
a tentative decision was also made that design, development, and
contract responsibilities for the Mercury tracking network would be
assigned to the Langley Research Center.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 5, Project Mercury, Jan. 20, 1959.
January 21
The screening of records for prospective astronauts began.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Background of Project Mercury Schedules, Aug. 14, 1960.
January 23
Funds in the amount of $1,556, 200 were made available to the Langley
Research Center for the Little Joe development program. The remaining
funds of total program costs ($3, 946,000) had already been made
available to Langley in a previous transfer of funds.
Memo, George Low to Dr. Silverstein, subject: Fund
Transfer to Langley Research Center for Little Joe Program, Jan. 23,
1959.
January 25
The pilot egress trainer was received from McDonnell and rough water
evaluation of the equipment was started immediately by Space Task Group
personnel. (See fig. 4.)
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 1 for Period Ending January 31, 1959.
 |
Figure 4. Pilot egress
trainer. |
January 26
NASA completed contract negotiations with McDonnell for the design and
development of the Mercury spacecraft. (See fig. 5.) At that time,
McDonnell estimated that the first 3 spacecraft could be delivered in
10 months. Spacecraft refinements slipped this estimated goal by only 2
months.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 6, Project Mercury, Feb. 3, 1959.
 |
Figure 5. Manufacture
of Mercury spacecraft at McDonnell plant, St. Louis, Mo. |
January 29
The Little Joe flight test program was drafted. This plan was updated
on April 14, 1959. Primary objectives of the test were to investigate
flight dynamics, check drogue parachute operations, determine
physiological effects of acceleration on a small primate, and, to some
extent, check the spacecraft aerodynamic characteristics.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 1 for Period Ending January 31, 1959, March 1959.
January 30
Admiral Arleigh Burke, Chief of Naval Operations, advised Dr. T. Keith
Glennan that Navy candidates for Project Mercury had started in the
first selection process.
Letter, Admiral Arleigh Burke, Chief of Naval
Operations to Dr. T. Keith Glennan, NASA Administrator (no subject),
Jan. 30, 1959.
January (during the month)
McDonnell, as prime contractor, selected Minneapolis-Honeywell as
subcontractor for the Mercury stabilization system. At that time, other
subcontractors were under consideration for the fabrication of various
components: Bell Aircraft Rockets Division, reaction control system;
and General Electric, Barnes Instruments, and Detroit Controls were
being considered for fabrication of the horizon scanner. Later Bell and
Barnes were awarded contracts for respective components.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 1 for Period Ending January 31, 1959, March 1959.
Balloon flights were planned for high-altitude qualification tests
of the complete spacecraft, including all instrumentation,
retrorockets, drogue parachute system, and recovery. Later balloon
flights would be manned to provide as much as 24 hours of training
followed by recovery at sea. The Space Task Group made surveys of
organizations experienced in the balloon field and recommended that the
Air Force Cambridge Research Center be given responsibilities for
designing, contracting, and conducting the balloon program.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 1 for Period Ending January 31, 1959; Memo,
George Low to NASA Administrator, subject: Status Report No. 5, Project
Mercury, Jan. 20, 1959.
Development of the Mercury pressure suit was started.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 1 for Period Ending January 31, 1959, March 1959.
Animal payloads, including pigs and small primates, were planned for
some of the Little Joe test flights.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 5, Project Mercury, Jan. 20, 1959.
January-February
Study contracts were awarded to Aeronutronics, Space Electronics, and
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lincoln Laboratory for
assistance in developing plans for tracking and ground instrumentation
for Project Mercury.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Background of Project Mercury Schedules, Aug. 14, 1960.
January-July
Investigations were conducted at the Arnold Engineering Development
Center, Tullahoma, Tennessee, in support of Project Mercury. Models of
the Mercury spacecraft were tested at speeds of Mach 8, 16, and 20 to
investigate stability, heat transfer, and pressure distribution of
Mercury components.
“A Chronology of the Arnold Engineering Development
Center,” AFSC Historical Publications, Series 62-101.
Hereinafter cited as “Chronology of Arnold Development Center.”
February 1-14
Some 508 records were reviewed for prospective pilot candidates of
which about 110 appeared to qualify. The special committee on Life
Sciences decided to divide these into two groups and 69 prospective
pilot candidates were briefed and interviewed in Washington. Out of
this number, 53 volunteered for the Mercury program, and 32 of the 53
were selected for further testing. The committee agreed there was no
further need to brief other individuals, because of the high qualities
exhibited in the existing pool of candidates. These 32 were scheduled
for physical examination at the Lovelace Clinic, Albuquerque, New
Mexico.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 5, Project Mercury, February 3, 1959.
February 5
The Navy agreed to perform field service functions in procurement and
supply in support of Project Mercury at the McDonnell Aircraft
Corporation plant site.
Letter, NASA Hq. to Chief of Navy Materiel,
Department of the Navy (no subject), Apr. 10, 1959.
NASA personnel visited the Wright Air Development Center to
investigate its methods and facilities for measuring airborne noise and
vibrations.
Memo, Michael A. Wedding to Lewis Space Task Group,
subject: Lewis Space Task Group's visit to Wright Patterson Air Force
Base, Dayton, Ohio, on February 5, 1959, Feb. 26, 1959.
February 6
Following industry-wide competition, a formal contract for research and
development of the Mercury spacecraft was negotiated with the McDonnell
Aircraft Corporation. The contract called for design and construction
of 12 Mercury spacecraft, but it did not include details on changes and
ground support equipment which were to be negotiated as the project
developed. Later, orders were placed with the company for eight
additional spacecraft, two procedural trainers, an environmental
trainer, and seven checkout trainers. McDonnell had been engaged in
studying the development of a manned spacecraft since the NACA
presentation in mid-March of 1958.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 7, Project Mercury, Feb. 17, 1959.
February 7
At the Lovelace Clinic, Albuquerque, New Mexico, the medical tests for
the Mercury astronaut selection were started.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 8, Project Mercury, Mar. 4, 1959.
February 10
Wiind tunnel tests of Project Mercury configuration models were
started. By the end of the year, over 70 different models had been
tested by facilities at the Air Force's Arnold Engineering Development
Center and the NASA Langley, Ames (fig. 6.), and Lewis Research
Centers.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31 1960.
 |
Figure 6. Shadowgraph
of spacecraft model in Ames Supersonic Free-Flight Pressurized Range.
|
February 11
Space Task Group and Army Ballistic Missile Agency personnel met at
Huntsville, Alabama, to discuss Redstone and Jupiter flight phases of
Project Mercury. During the course of the meeting the following points
became firm: (1) Space Task Group was the overall manager and technical
director of this phase of the program, (2) ABMA was responsible for the
launch vehicle until spacecraft separation, (3) ABMA was responsible
for the Redstone launch vehicle recovery (this phase of the program was
later eliminated since benefits from recovering the launch vehicle
would have been insignificant), (4) Space Task Group was responsible
for the spacecraft flight after separation, (5) McDonnell was
responsible for the adapters for the Mercury-Redstone configuration,
and (6) ABMA would build adapters for the Mercury-Jupiter
configuration. Because many points could only be settled by detailed
design studies, it was decided to establish several working panels for
later meetings.
Memo, Paul E. Purser, Space Task Group, to Project
Mercury Director, subject: Project Mercury Meeting on February 11,
1959, at ABMA, February 17, 1959. Memo, George Low to NASA
Administrator, subject: Status Report No. 8, Project Mercury, Mar. 4,
1959.
February 12
Search and recovery support by the Navy was discussed in a meeting with
officials of that service and NASA. At the end of the conference, a
NASA-Navy Committee was formed to work out a detailed plan. NASA
members included E. C. Buckley, C. W. Mathews, and G. M. Low. The Navy
was represented by Captain J. W. Gannon, with other members to be
chosen at a later date.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 7, Project Mercury, Feb. 17, 1959.
February 12-13
Discussions were held at Langley Field between the Space Task Group and
the Air Force Ballistic Missile Division covering aspects of the use of
Atlas launch vehicles in Project Mercury. Specifically discussed were
technical details of the first Atlas test flight (Big Joe), the abort
sensing capability for later flights, and overall program objectives.
Memo, A. C. Bond to Director of Project Mercury,
subject: Visit of Ballistic Missile Division, Space Technology
Laboratories, and Convair Representatives to Space Task Group on
February 12 and 13, 1959, regarding Atlas Booster for Project Mercury,
Feb. 18, 1959.
February 15
The medical examinations at the Wright Air Development Center for the
final selection of the Mercury astronauts were started.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 8, Project Mercury, Mar. 4, 1959.
February 17
The first formal meeting of the Navy-NASA Committee on Project Mercury
search and recovery operations was held. They decided that joint
recovery exercises would be initiated as soon as possible. The
committee members determined that the Navy, particularly the Atlantic
fleet, could support operations from Wallops Island; could perform
search and recovery operations along the Atlantic Missile Range, using
of the selected Project Mercury vehicles; and that naval units could
support operations in the escape area between Cape Canaveral and
Bermuda.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 8, Project Mercury, Mar. 4, 1959.
Members of the Space Task Group, Langley, Ames, McDonnell and NASA
Headquarters drafted a coordinated program for wind tunnel and
free-flight tests in support of Project Mercury.
Memo, Abe Silverstein, Director of Space Flight
Development, NASA Hq., to Director of Aeronautical and Space Research,
NASA Hq., subject: Langley and Ames Research Center Support for Project
Mercury, March 6, 1959, and two inclosures.
February 19
In a speech, Dr. T. K. Glennan estimated that Project Mercury would
cost over $200 million. The cost, he said in effect, was high because a
new area of technology was being explored for the first time and there
were no precedents or experience factors from which to draw, and
because the world-wide tracking network construction was a tremendous
undertaking.
Draft Memorandum, John H. Disher to David Williamson,
NASA Hq., no subject, March 31, 1960.
February 20
Responsibility for planning and contracting for Project Mercury
tracking facilities was formally assigned to the Langley Research
Center (see January 16, 1959, entry).
Memo, NASA Hq., to Langley, subject: Request the
Langley Research Center Assume Responsibilities for Project Mercury
Instrumentation Facilities, Feb. 20, 1959.
February 24
Mercury-Redstone-Jupiter Study Panel Number IV (choice of trajectory,
aerodynamics, and flight loads) met at Redstone Arsenal. Subjects
studied included pilot safety, simulation of entry from orbit, length
of zero-g time, missile stability and aerodynamics, ascent
accelerations, and range. This group reconvened on March 13, 1959.
Report No. 1, Mercury-Redstone-Jupiter Study Panel
No. IV, March 20, 1959.
February 26
Panel Number I (Design Subcommittee) met at Redstone Arsenal for the
first time to discuss integration requirements for the Mercury
spacecraft with the Redstone and Jupiter launch vehicles.
Memo, William M. Bland, Jr., to Director of Project
Mercury, subject: First Meeting of Panel Number 1 Held February 26,
1959, at ABMA, Huntsville, Alabama, March 4, 1959.
Space Task Group and Langley Research Center personnel visited the
Arnold Engineering Development Center, Tullahoma, Tennessee, to
ascertain if the AEDC facilities were equipped to perform tests on
scale models of the Mercury spacecraft and to arrange a testing
schedule.
Memo, Albin O. Pearson to Associate Director, NASA
Langley, subject: Visit of NASA Personnel to AEDC, Tullahoma, Tenn.,
for the Purpose of Discussing the Testing of Models of the McDonnell
(Project Mercury) Capsule in the AEDC Facilities, March 5, 1959.
February 27
Space Task Group personnel established the design trajectory for the
Big Joe flight test. Convair Astronautics and Space Technology
Laboratories personnel provided consultation and advice on ways in
which these trajectory requirements could be met.
Memo, Christopher C. Kraft to Director, Project
Mercury, subject: Meeting with Space Technology Laboratories and
Convair Representatives on Feb. 27, 1959, to Discuss Design
Trajectories for First Atlas-Capsule Ablation Test, March 2, 1959.
February (during the month)
During a meeting between personnel of the Space Task Group and the Air
Force Ballistic Missile Division, the responsibilities of the two
organizations were outlined for the first two Atlas firings. Space
Technology Laboratories, under Air Force Ballistic Missile Division
direction, would select the design trajectories according to the
specifications set forth by the Space Task Group. These specifications
were to match a point in the trajectory at about 450,000 feet,
corresponding to a normal reentry condition for the manned spacecraft
after firing of the retrorockets at an altitude of 120 nautical miles.
Space Technology Laboratories would also provide impact dispersion
data, data for range safety purposes, and the necessary reprograming of
the guidance computers. The spacecraft for the suborbital Atlas flights
would be manufactured under the deriction of the Lewis Research Center,
based on Space Task Group designs. Space Task Group was developing the
spacecraft instrumentation, with a contingent of personnel at the Lewis
Research Center. The attitude control system was being developed by
Lewis.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 8, Project Mercury, Mar. 4, 1959.
Six working panels concerned with various aspects of the
Mercury-Redstone program were formed to resolve problem areas that
might arise. Later the number of panels was reduced to four, and then
to three. Typical areas of study included design coordination, pilot
safety, and aerodynamics, to name a few.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
March 6
Space Task Group and McDonnell officials met in St. Louis, Missouri, to
discuss spare part and ground support equipment requirements for
Project Mercury. Shortly thereafter, McDonnell submitted a preliminary
plan for spare parts and check-out equipment to Space Task Group and
NASA Headquarters for review.
Memo, George Low, Chief, Manned Space Flight
Development, NASA Hq., subject: Proposed Contract Amendments, Project
Mercury Capsule, March 12, 1959.
March 8
An abort test was conducted at Wallops Island on a full-scale model of
the spacecraft with the escape tower, using a Recruit escape rocket.
The configuration did not perform as expected (erratic motion), and as
a result, the Langley Research Center was requested to test small-scale
flight models of the abort system to determine its motion in flight.
Memo, Howard S. Carter and Carl A. Sandahl to
Associate Director, NASA-Langley, subject: Weekly Progress Report for
Week of March 8, 1959, on Langley Support of Project Mercury, March 16,
1959.
March 9
The Langley Research Center began exploratory noise transmission tests.
The Center had also completed a report on rocket engine noise for use
in determining the level of noise to which the prototype Mercury
spacecraft would be subjected.
Memo, Howard S. Carter and Carl A. Sandahl to
Associate Director, NASA-Langley, subject: Weekly Progress Report for
Week of March 8, 1959, on Langley Support of Project Mercury, March 16,
1959.
Tests were in progress at Langley and Wallops Island on several
types of ablating materials under environmental conditions that would
be experienced by a spacecraft reentering from orbit.
Memo, Howard S. Carter and Carl A. Sandahl to
Associate Director, NASA-Langley, subject: Weekly Progress Report for
Week of March 8, 1959, on Langley Support of Project Mercury, March 16,
1959.
March 10
The Space Task Group was notified by McDonnell that several of its
subcontractors were experiencing difficulties in procuring material
necessary to fabricate Project Mercury components. This delay was being
caused by the lack of a DX priority procurement rating.
Letter, McDonnell Aircraft Corporation to
NASA-Langley, subject: NAS 5-59, Effect of DO Priority Rating on
Delivery Schedule, March 10, 1959.
March 11
Langley's Pilotless Aircraft Research Division conducted, at Wallops
Island, the first full-scale test simulating a pad-abort situation. A
full weight and size spacecraft was used. For the first 50 feet the
flight was essentially straight, indicating the successful functioning
of the abort rocket. Thereafter, the spacecraft pitched through several
turns and impacted a short distance from the shore. The malfunction was
traced to the loss of a graphite insert from one of the three abort
rocket nozzles, which caused a misalignment of thrust.
Memo, Howard S. Carter to Associate Director,
NASA-Langley, subject: Progress Report for Week of March 15, 1959, on
Langley Support of Project Mercury, March 25, 1959; Memo, George Low to
NASA Administrator, subject: Status Report No. 10, Project Mercury,
March 24, 1959.
March 16
Purchase approval in the amount of $125,000 was requested by the Space
Task Group from NASA Headquarters for the procurement of five
developmental pressure suits for Project Mercury.
Message, NASA 169, NASA-Langley to NASA Hq., March
16, 1959.
March 17
Funds were requested to purchase 6 main parachute and 12 drogue
parachute canisters (fig. 7) from the Goodyear Aircraft Corporation in
support of the Little Joe and Big Joe phases of Project Mercury.
Memo, Andre J. Meyer, Jr., Space Task Group Chief,
Engineering and Contract Administration Division, subject: Contracting
of Parachute Canisters for Little Joe and Big Joe Development
Launchings for Project Mercury, March 20, 1959.
 |
Figure 7. Equipment
installation in the parachute canister. |
March 17-18
A Mock-Up Inspection Board meeting was held at the McDonnell plant to
review the completed spacecraft mock-up. (See fig. 8.) As a result of
this meeting, the contractor was directed to restudy provisions made
for pilot egress; rearrange crew space to make handles, actuators, and
other instruments more accessible to the pilot; and modify the clock,
sequence lights, and other displays. This same type of meeting was held
on many subsequent occasions to review production spacecraft.
Project Mercury Model 133 Mock-Up Review, Rpt.
No. 6727, McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, March 17-18, 1959.
 |
Figure 8. McDonnell
mock-up of Mercury spacecraft including Atlas adapter and escape
system. |
March 20
John H. Disher was appointed as coordinator of the study panels. The
purpose of this function was to prepare a unified source of information
for organizations involved in the Mercury Program. The objective was to
bring program plans and proposals together at a central location.
Memo, Robert R. Gilruth to Langley Space Task Group,
subject: Coordination of Meetings of Study Panels for Mercury Capsule
Booster Systems, March 20, 1959.
Mercury-Redstone and Mercury-Jupiter test objectives were discussed
in a meeting at Langley between Space Task Group and Army Ballistic
Missile Agency personnel. At that time it was decided that the first
flights of both the Redstone and Jupiter would be unmanned. The second
flights would be “manned” with primates, and the Jupiter phase would
end at that point. The six remaining Redstones would be used in manned
flights for astronaut training.
Memo, Walter J. Kapryan, subject: Project Mercury
Meeting on March 20, 1959 at Langley Field, Virginia, March 26, 1959.
Space Task Group personnel prepared a study on the “Recovery
Operations for Project Mercury” covering plans for suborbital and
orbital flights. This document was forwarded to the Department of
Defense for comment and for briefing of appropriate units.
NASA-Space Task Group Study, Recovery Operations
for Project Mercury, March 20, 1959.
March 23
As of this date, the McDonnell Aircraft Corporation listed some 32
items that required a DX priority procurement rating in support of
Project Mercury. This highest national priority procurement rating had
been requested by NASA on November 14, 1958.
Letter, McDonnell Aircraft Corporation to George Low,
NASA Hq., subject: NAS 5-59, Items Which Require DX Priority Rating,
March 23, 1959.
March 26
The Langley Research Center received approval for funds to conduct
hypersonic flight tests for the Mercury spacecraft. Langley's Pilotless
Aircraft Research Division would conduct tests on heat transfer rates
at a velocity of mach 17, and dynamic behavior tests from a velocity of
mach 10 to a subsonic speed.
Memo, NASA Director of Aeronautical and Space
Research to Director, Space Flight Development, subject: Transfer of
Funds to Langley Research Center for PARD Flight Testing of Project
Mercury Capsule, March 20, 1959, and March 26, 1959, approval.
Space Task Group, Langley Research Center, and Air Force School of
Aviation Medicine personnel met to plan bio-pack experiments that would
be placed in several of the Little Joe research and development test
flights.
Minutes of Meeting, Project Mercury, subject:
Bio-Paks for Little Joe Flights 2, 3, and 4, June 18, 1959.
March 27
Dr. T. Keith Glennan, the NASA Administrator, provided instructions for
the marking of vehicles launched for the NASA, including the Mercury
spacecraft. He stated that policy would be to paint UNITED STATES in
bold block form.
Memo, Floyd L. Thompson, Acting Director, Langley
Research Center, subject: Identification of Vehicles Launched for NASA,
April15, 1959.
March 28
Space Task Group officials were involved in an investigation as to
whether the escape system should be changed. In the original proposal,
McDonnell's plan was to use eight small rockets housed in a fin
adapter, but this plan was set aside for a NASA developed plan in which
a single-motor tripod would be used. Later, during a test of the escape
system, the escape rockets appeared to fire properly but the spacecraft
began to tumble after launch. This tumbling action caused concern, and
Space Task Group engineers felt that the tower-escape system might have
to be discarded, and a “second look” was taken at the McDonnell
proposal. The engineers concluded, however, that there were too many
problems involved and the single-motor tripod concept was retained and
has been proven to be quite effective. (See fig. 9.)
Memo, Howard S. Carter to Associate Director,
NASA-Langley, subject: Progress Report for Week of March 29, 1959, on
Langley Support of Project Mercury, April 7, 1959.
Figure 9. Escape rocket motor. |
March 29
Studies were in progress to determine the optimum altitude for
separation of the Little Joe spacecraft from its launch vehicle.
Memo, Howard S. Carter to Associate Director,
NASA-Langley, subject: Progress Report for Week of March 29, 1959, on
Langley Support of Project Mercury, April 7, 1959.
March 30
Space Task Group personnel visited the Atlantic Missile Range at the
invitation of the Army Ballistic Missile Agency to observe a Jupiter
launch vehicle firing and the procedures followed on the day preceding
the firing. The group toured the blockhouse and received briefings on
various recorders that might be used in the centralized control
facility for Mercury-Redstone and Mercury-Jupiter flights.
Memo, Christopher C. Kraft, Jr., to Director of
Project Mercury, subject: Visit to AFMTC on March 13, and March 30,
1959, to Witness a Jupiter Dry-Run Procedure and Talk with AFMTC Range
Safety Personnel, April 13, 1959.
March 31
Range Safety personnel at the Atlantic Missile Range were briefed by
Space Task Group personnel on the description of the Mercury
spacecraft, how it would function during a normal flight on an Atlas
launch vehicle, and suggest methods for initiation of an abort during
different powered phases of a flight. Atlantic Missile Range personnel
discussed their past experience, and work was started to draft a
Project Mercury range safety plan.
Memo, William M. Bland, Jr., and Christopher C.
Kraft, Jr., to Director of Project Mercury, subject: Meeting with Range
Safety People at AFMTC, March 31, 1959, April 3, 1959.
April 2
A preliminary briefing was conducted for prospective bidders on
construction of the worldwide tracking range for Project Mercury. This
meeting was attended by representatives from 20 companies. At this time
the preliminary plan called for an orbital mission tracking network of
14 sites. Contacts had not been made with the governments of any of the
proposed locations with the exception of Bermuda. It was planned that
all the sites would have facilities for telemetry, voice communications
with the pilot, and teletype (wire or radio) communications with
centers in the United States for primary tracking. The tracking sites
would provide the control center at Cape Canaveral, Florida, with
trajectory predictions; landing-area predictions; and vehicle, systems,
and pilot conditions.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 11, Project Mercury, April 6, 1959; Project Mercury
[Quarterly] Status Report No. 2 for Period Ending April 30, 1959.
Crew selection for Project Mercury was completed, resulting in the
selection of seven astronauts to participate in the Mercury program.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report Project Mercury, April 6, 1959.
April 2-16
NASA and the military services conducted meetings to draft final plans
for the Project Mercury animal payload program. The animal program was
planned to cover nine flights, involving Little Joe, Redstone, Jupiter,
and Atlas launch vehicles.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 12, Project Mercury, April 16, 1959.
An initial orientation was given to the seven Project Mercury
astronauts, when they reported to the Space Task Group for duty.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Background of Project Mercury Schedules, Aug. 14, 1960.
After responsibility for the worldwide tracking range construction
of Project Mercury had been assumed by the Langley Research Center, the
following study contracts were placed: (1) Aeronutronics to study radar
coverage and trajectory computation requirements, (2) RCA Service
Corporation for specification writing, (3) Lincoln Laboratories for
consultant services and proposal evaluations, and (4) Space Electronics
for the design of the control center at Cape Canaveral.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 11, Project Mercury, April 6, 1959.
The Chief of Naval Operations directed the Atlantic Fleet to support
Project Mercury as follows: (1) landing and recovery systems in the
area of Norfolk, Virginia, to develop spacecraft pickup and handling
techniques for ships and helicopters, (2) recovery of capsules on solid
rocket launch vehicle tests in the area of Wallops Island, and (3)
Atlas launch vehicle development or ballistic flights from the Atlantic
Missile Range. Details for orbital flight support had not been
accomplished at that time.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 11, Project Mercury, April 6, 1959.
April 9
At a press conference in Washington, D.C., Dr. T. Keith Glennan
announced that seven pilots had been selected for the Mercury program.
These were Lt. Commander Alan B. Shepard, Jr., Navy; Captain Virgil I.
Grissom, Air Force; Lt. Colonel John H. Glenn, Jr., Marines; Lieutenant
Malcolm Scott Carpenter, Navy; Lt. Commander Walter M. Schirra, Jr.,
Navy; Captain Donald K. Slayton, Air Force; Captain Leroy Gordon
Cooper, Jr., Air Force. (See fig. 10.)
Hearing before the Committee on Science and
Astronautics, U.S. House of Representatives, 86th Congress, 1st
Session, Meeting with the Astronauts, Project Mercury, Man-in-Space
Program, May 28, 1959.
 |
Figure 10. The seven
Mercury astronauts: L to R: Carpenter, Cooper, Glenn, Grissom, Schirra,
Shepard and Slayton. |
April 9-10
Investigations of two escape configurations for Mercury spacecraft were
conducted in a 16-foot transonic circuit at the Arnold Engineering
Development Center, Tullahoma, Tennessee, for determination of static
stability and drag characteristics of the configurations. (See fig.
11.)
“A Chronology of the Arnold Engineering Development
Center”; History of Arnold Engineering Development Center,
January-June 1959, Vol. I, pp. 38-41.
 |
Figure 11. Scale model
of escape tower configuration tested at Arnold Engineering Development
Center. |
April 10
Escape-motor canting-angle tests were completed at Wallops Island.
Tests were conducted in 5 degree increments between 10 degrees to 30
degrees, and visually it appeared stability was better at the larger
angle.
Memo, Howard S. Carter to Associate Director, NASA
Langley, subject: Progress for Week of April 12, 1959, on Langley
Support of Project Mercury, April 21, 1959.
April 12
Tests were in progress at Langley in which an aluminium honeycomb
structure was used partially to absorb the spacecraft impact load. (See
fig. 12.) Robert R. Gilruth, Project Mercury Director, had stated his
belief of this requirement on January 16, 1959.
Memo, Howard S. Carter to Associate Director, NASA
Langley, subject: Progress for Week of April 12, 1959, on Langley
Support of Project Mercury, April 21, 1959.
Space Task Group conducted the second full-scale beach abort test on
Wallops Island. A deliberate thrust misalignment of 1 inch was
programed into the escape combination. Lift-off was effected cleanly,
and a slow pitch started during the burning of the escape rocket motor.
The tower separated as scheduled and the drogue and main parachutes
deployed as planned. The test was fully successful.
Memo, Howard S. Carter to Associate Director, NASA
Langley, subject: Progress for Week of April 12, 1959, on Langley
Support of Project Mercury, April 21, 1959.
 |
Figure 12. Honeycomb
structure partially to absorb impact force. |
April 13
Two small-scale spacecraft escape-tower combinations were launched
successfully at Wallops Island, and on the next day a full-scale
spacecraft escape system was launched. The complete sequence of events
—escape system firing, escape tower jettisoning, parachute deployment,
landing, and helicopter recovery—was satisfactory.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 12, Project Mercury, April 16, 1959.
NASA placed a request with the Navy for the use of its Aviation
Medical Acceleration Laboratory at Johnsville, Pennsylvania. NASA
desired to use the laboratory's AMAL human centrifuge in support of the
Mercury astronaut training program.
Letter, Warren J. North, NASA, to Captain F. K.
Smith, Director, AMAL, subject: Request for use of Centrifuge at AMAL,
Johnsville, April 13, 1959.
Rear Admiral J. W. Gannon was appointed by Donald A. Quarles, Deputy
Secretary of Defense, to head a Department of Defense group to study
with NASA the recovery aspects of Project Mercury.
Letter, Deputy Secretary of Defense to Dr. Glennan,
no subject, April 13, 1959.
April 15
Ground-instrumentation requirements for firing Little Joe test vehicles
at Wallops Island were drafted. These requirements involved pulse
radars, camera, Doppler radar, wind-monitoring instruments, telemetry
equipment, and a ground destruct system.
Memo, Charles H. McFall to Associate Director, NASA
Langley, subject: Project Little Joe: Ground Instrumentation Required
During Firing of Little Joe models at Wallops Island, April 15, 1959.
April 16
NASA and the military services held a meeting to discuss the search and
recovery aspects of Project Mercury. Admiral Gannon, the service
spokesman, stated that the meeting was exploratory but that the Navy
and other services would support the project.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 12, Project Mercury, April 16, 1959.
Space Task Group, Langley Research Center, and Lewis Research Center
personnel met to discuss development plans regarding construction and
instrumentation of Big Joe Number I reentry spacecraft test vehicle.
During the course of this meeting, milestone objectives of the work to
be accomplished were drafted.
Memo, Howard S. Carter to Associate Director, NASA
Langley, subject: Progress for Week of April 19, 1959, on Langley
Support of Project Mercury, April 27, 1959.
NASA requested that the Air Force furnish two TF-102B and two T-33
aircraft to be used by the Project Mercury astronauts. One of the
requirements in the astronaut training program was to maintain
proficiency in high performance aircraft.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 12, Project Mercury, April 16, 1959.
April 22
In a meeting at Langley, NASA officials concluded that the tower
configuration was the best escape system for the Mercury spacecraft and
development would proceed using this concept. (See fig. 13.) However,
limited studies of alternate configurations would continue (see March
28, 1959, entry).
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 13, Project Mercury, May 6, 1959.
 |
Figure 13. Spacecraft
and escape system configuration. |
April 23-24
A meeting was held at Langley to coordinate the activities of
individuals who would be engaged in handling, reducing, and analyzing
data received from the Big Joe spacecraft. Procedures for data pickup
and for supplying the information to the appropriate installation were
established. A majority of the data reduction workload was carried out
by the Lewis Research Center and the Space Task Group.
Memo, M. J. Krasnican to Space Task Group records,
subject: Coordination Meeting on Data Handling, Reduction, and Analysis
for Big Joe Capsule held at Langley Space Task Group, April 23, 24,
1959, Apr. 28, 1959.
April 27
Project Mercury was accorded the DX priority procurement rating.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 13, Project Mercury, May 6, 1959.
The seven Project Mercury astronauts reported for duty and their
training program was undertaken immediately.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 2 for Period Ending April 30, 1959; Memo, George
Low to NASA Administrator, subject: Status Report No. 13, Project
Mercury, May 6, 1959.
A tentative schedule of astronaut activities for the first months of
training was issued. Actual training began the next day. Within 3
months the astronauts were acquainted with the various facets of the
Mercury program. The first training week was as follows: Monday, April
27, check in; April 28, general briefing; April 29, spacecraft
configuration and escape methods; April 30, support and restraint; May
1, operational concepts and procedures. These lectures were presented
by specialists in the particular field of study. Besides the above,
unscheduled activities involved 3 hours flying time and 4 hours of
athletics.
Tentative Schedule of Activities for First Months of
Training Program (beginning Monday, April 27, 1959).
April 27-28
The Department of Defense working group on Mercury search and recovery
operations met at Patrick Air Force Base, Florida, to establish service
responsibilities and support for the first two Mercury-Atlas ballistic
flights.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 13, Project Mercury, May 6, 1959.
April (during the month)
In the recovery landing system, the extended-skirt main parachute was
found to be unsafe for operation at altitudes of 10,000 feet and was
replaced by a “ring-sail” parachute of similar size. This decision was
made after a drop when the main parachute failed to open and assumed a
“squidding” condition. Although little damage was sustained by the
spacecraft on water impact, parachute experts decided that the
ring-sail configuration should be adopted, and the air drop spacecraft
were fitted.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 2 for Period Ending April 30, 1959; Memorandum,
Robert R. Gilruth, Director of Project Mercury, to NASA Hq., subject:
Required Basic Research on Parachutes to Support Manned Space Flight,
July 6, 1959.
May 1
A Little Joe Project Coordination Meeting, attended by personnel from
Space Task Group, McDonnell, and Wallops Island, was held for the first
time. The purpose of the meeting was to determine the status of various
developmental phases and whether or not proper coordination was being
effected with other related projects in the Mercury program (Big Joe,
Mercury-Atlas, Mercury-Redstone, and Mercury-Jupiter). The important
factor with regard to the latter item was whether or not a reasonable
launch schedule could be established and maintained.
Memo, Ronald Kolenkiewicz and John B. Lee to
Director, Project Mercury, subject: Coordination Meeting for Little Joe
Project, May 6, 1959.
May 5
Space Task Group personnel held a meeting to discuss the complete
recovery test program. Items of consideration included the availability
of model spacecraft for the test, deciding the areas in which the tests
would be held (Phase I—Wallops Island drops, and Phase II—Atlantic
drops), and establishing the time schedule for the test program.
Memo, Robert R. Gilruth, Director of Project Mercury,
to Hartley A. Soule, Langley Research Center, subject: Request for
Assistance of Langley Research Center in Project Mercury Capsule Drop
Test Program, June 2, 1959, with inclosures.
May 6
Pigs were eliminated as Little Joe flight test subjects when studies
disclosed that they could not survive long periods of time on their
backs. However, McDonnell did use a pig, “Gentle Bess,” to test the
impact crushable support, and the test was successful.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 13, Project Mercury, May 6, 1959.
May 11
A spacecraft recovery study contract was awarded to Grumman Aircraft
Corporation.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Background of Project Mercury Schedules, Aug. 14, 1960.
A NASA policy concerning Mercury astronauts was issued. The
astronauts were subject to the regulations and directives of NASA, and
information of unclassified nature reported by the astronauts would be
disseminated to the public. These were but two examples in the policy
statement.
Senate Report, No. 1014, 86th Congress, 1st Session,
subject: Project Mercury Man-in-Space Program of the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, 86th Congress (Dec. 1, 1959).
May 12-14
An informal meeting of the Mock-Up Inspection Board was held at
McDonnell to review changes to the spacecraft development program
resulting from the March mock-up meeting. Besides the review, a number
of suggestions were made for changes in the crew space layout to permit
more effective use of the controls, particularly when the astronaut was
in the pressure suit in a full-pressurized condition. Among suggested
changes were the shoulder harness release, the spacecraft compression
and decompression handles, the ready switch, and the spacecraft squib
switch. Test subjects also found that when in the fully pressurized
suit none of the circuit breakers could be reached. McDonnell was
directed to act on these problem areas.
Minutes of Mock-Up Review held at McDonnell Aircraft
Corporation, May 12-14, 1959.
May 17
The Langley Research Center was in the process of preparing a
one-fourteenth scale model of the Mercury spacecraft for launch from
Wallops Island on a five-stage rocket to a speed of mach 18.
Memo, Howard S. Carter to Associate Director, NASA
Langley, subject: Progress for May 17-31, 1959, on Langley Support of
Project Mercury, June 3, 1959.
May 21
Langley Specification Number S-45, entitled “Specifications for
Tracking and Ground Instrumentation System for Project Mercury,” was
issued. Proposals were received from seven contractor teams by June 22,
1959, and technical evaluations were started.
Memo, Howard S. Carter to Associate Director, NASA
Langley, subject: Progress for May 17-31, 1959, on Langley Support of
Project Mercury, June 3, 1959; Memo, H. J. E. Reid, Director NASA
Langley, to NASA Hq., subject: Further Plans for the Procurement and
Ground Instrumentation Systems for Project Mercury, June 26, 1959.
May 22
The Space Task Group, in the process of negotiations with the Army
Ordnance Missile Command on the cost of Redstone and Jupiter boosters
in support of Project Mercury, received revised funding estimates for
study covering Contract HS-44 (Redstone) and HS-54 (Jupiter).
Memo, Paul E. Purser to Director, Project Mercury,
subject: Analysis of AOMC Revised Funding Estimates for Redstone and
Jupiter, HS-44 and HS-54, June 5, 1959.
The Project Mercury balloon flight test program was canceled. The
Space Task Group oficials determined that the spacecraft could be
tested environmentally in the Lewis Research Center's altitude wind
tunnel. This included correct temperature and altitude simulations to
80,000 feet. The pilot could exercise the attitude control system and
retrorockets could be fired in the tunnel. Because an active contract
did exist with the Air Force, it was decided the two balloon drop tests
with unmanned boiler-plate spacecraft would be accomplished.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Status Report No. 14, Project Mercury, May 22, 1959.
May 25
A meeting was held at Johnsville, Pennsylvania, to consider astronaut
training programs on the centrifuge. (See fig. 14.) During this
meeting, Space Task Group personnel reviewed a draft memorandum
prepared by the Aviation Medical Acceleration Laboratory concerning the
methods they felt should be used. Also, possible centrifuge training
periods for the astronauts were discussed, and tentative dates were set
for August 1959 and January 1960.
Memo, Euclid C. Holleman to Chief, Research Division,
NASA High-Speed Flight Station, subject: Meeting to Consider Plans for
the Aviation Medical Acceleration Laboratory for the Next Fiscal Year,
May 25, 1959.
 |
Figure 14. Human
centrifuge at the Navy's Aviation Medical Acceleration Laboratory,
Johnsville, Pennsylvania, used in Mercury astronaut training program.
|
May 28
North American Aviation delivered the first two Little Joe booster
airframes, and noted that the four remaining were on fabrication
schedule. The planned program was moving smoothly, for rocket motors to
be used in the first flight were available at Wallops Station,
Virginia, the test flight launching site. In addition, procurement of
the test spacecraft incorporating Mercury flight items was on schedule,
and the first spacecraft had been instrumented by Space Task Group
personnel. Work was also in progress on other test spacecraft.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Background of Project Mercury Schedules, August 14, 1960.
Primates Able and Baker, aboard an Army Jupiter missile nose cone,
were launched 300 miles into space and landed 1,700 miles down range
from the launch site at Cape Canaveral. Telemetry data disclosed that
the responses of the animals were normal for the conditions they were
experiencing. During the boost phase, when the higher g-loads were
being sustained, body temperature, respiration, pulse rate, and
heartbeat rose but were well within tolerable limits. During the
weightless period along the trajectory arc, the physiological responses
of Able and Baker approached normal—so near, in fact, that according
to telemetry data, Baker appeared either to doze or to become drowsy.
Upon reentry, the responses rose again, but at landing the animals were
nearing a settled physiological state. This flight was another
milestone proving that life could be sustained in a space environment.
Grimwood, History of the Jupiter Missile Program, July 1962; House Committee Print No. 35, Hearing Before the Committee
on Science and Astronautics, U.S. House of Representatives, Jupiter
Missile Shot—Biomedical Experiments, June 3, 1959.
A quick-release, side exit hatch was designed for the spacecraft.
The design consisted of a continuous double explosive train to assure
that all bolts were actually broken upon activation of the device.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 4 for Period Ending October 31, 1959.
During this period, the astronauts and other NASA personnel devoted
a great deal of study to the Mercury spacecraft cockpit. The following
factors were under particular scrutiny: (1) routine and emergency
flight procedures; (2) anthropometric dimensions of the seven
astronauts, which had demonstrated flight safety inadequacies in the
early layout of the cockpit; and (3) layout requirements which were
reviewed according to the dimensions of the astronauts while wearing a
full-pressure garment, in both routine unpressurized and pressurized
states, and according to the astronaut's ability to reach any control
under both routine and emergency conditions. (See fig. 15.)
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 4 for Period Ending October 31, 1959.
 |
Figure 15. Spacecraft
interior arrangement. |
June 1
Personnel strength in support of Project Mercury included 204 at the
Space Task Group, 98 at the Langley Research Center, 44 at the Lewis
Research Center, and 21 on the Mercury tracking network, for a grand
total of 363.
Chart, Space Task Group Complement Analysis, June 1,
1959.
June 5
The drogue parachute configuration was changed from 19.5 percent
porosity, flat circular ribbon chute to a 28 percent porosity, 30
degree conical canopy.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 3 for Period Ending July 31, 1959.
The Army Ballistic Missile Agency submitted a proposal (Report No.
DG-TR-7-59) for a Mercury-Redstone inflight abort sensing system. This
system would monitor performance of the control system (attitude and
angular velocity), electrical power supply, and launch vehicle
propulsion. If operational limits were exceeded, the spacecraft would
be ejected from the launch vehicle and recovered by parachute.
Study, Proposal for Mercury-Redstone Automatic
Inflight Abort Sensing System by F. W. Brandner, prepared by the Army
Ballistic Missile Agency, June 5, 1959.
Space Technology Laboratories and Convair completed an analysis of
flight instrumentation necessary to support the Mercury-Atlas program.
The primary objective of the study was to select a light-weight
telemetry system. A system weighing 270 pounds was recommended, and the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration concurred with the
proposal.
Letter, Space Technology Laboratories, Inc., to NASA
Space Task Group, subject: Atlas Telemetry Configuration, Project
Mercury Orbital Flights, June 5, 1959; Letter, NASA Hq. to E. B. Doll,
Space Technology Laboratories, subject: Details of Atlas Telemetry
System for Project Mercury Flights, July 7, 1959.
June 8
The Big Joe spacecraft for the reentry test was delivered to Cape
Canaveral.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Background of Project Mercury Schedules, Aug. 14, 1960.
The Space Task Group advised the Navy's Bureau of Aeronautics of
Government-furnished survival items that McDonnell would package in
containers. (See fig. 16.) These included desalter kits, dye marker,
distress signal, signal mirrors, signal whistle, first aid kits, shark
chaser, PK-2 raft, survival rations, matches, and a radio transceiver.
Navy assistance was requested in the procurement of these items.
Letter, NASA Space Task Group, Bureau of Aeronautics,
Department of the Navy, subject: Project Mercury Survival Equipment,
June 8, 1959.
Space Task Group officials met with representatives of the School of
Aviation Medicine to discuss detailed aspects of the bio-packs to be
used in the NASA Little Joe Flight program. The packs were to be
furnished by the school. The purpose was to gather life support data
that would be applicable to the manned flights of Project Mercury.
Space Task Group Minutes of Meeting, subject:
Bio-Packs for Little Joe Flights 2, 3, and 4, June 8, 1959, at Space
Task Group, June 18, 1959.
 |
Figure 16. Astronaut
survival equipment stowed in Mercury spacecraft. |
June 12
A Source Selection Panel and a Technical Evaluation Board were
organized and manned at the Langley Research Center to evaluate Mercury
tracking and ground instrument action proposals. Technical evaluation
of proposals was started on June 23, 1959, with seven companies under
consideration. These were—in addition to Western Electric—
Aeronutronics, Radio Corporation of America, Pan American Airways,
Brown and Root, Chrysler Corporation, and Philco Corporation.
Memo, H. J. E. Reid, Director of Langley Research
Center to All Concerned, subject: Designation of Organization,
Membership and Operating Procedures for the Source Selection Panel and
the Technical Evaluation Board—Tracking and Ground Instrumentation,
Project Mercury, June 12, 1959.
June 14-27
A visit was made to McDonnell and it was learned that the Mercury
spacecraft was being designed structurally to withstand 149 decibels
overall noise level. McDonnell, however, anticipated that the actual
maximum level would not be above 128 decibels. Space Task Group
personnel felt that even the 128 decibels were too high for pilot
comfort, and extensive research toward the resolution of this matter
was started.
Memo, Howard S. Carter to Associate Director, NASA
Langley, subject: Progress for June 14-27, 1959, on Langley's Support
of Project Mercury, June 30, 1959.
June 18
A centrifuge program was conducted at Johnsville, Pennsylvania, to
investigate the role of a pilot in the launch of a multi-stage vehicle.
Test subjects were required to perform boost-control tasks, while being
subjected to the proper boost-control accelerations. The highest
g-force experienced was 15, and none of the test subjects felt they
reached the limit of their control capability. As a note of interest,
one of the test subjects, Neil Armstrong, was later selected for the
Gemini program in September 1962.
Memo to Chief, High-Speed Flight Station, subject:
Summary of Boost Centrifuge Program.
June 19
The Mercury Capsule (spacecraft) Coordination Office was organized
within the Space Task Group, with J. A. Chamberlin appointed head of
the office. Duties were divided into four major categories as follows:
(1) loads, thermodynamics, structures, and aerodynamics; (2) cabin,
life support, and controls; (3) electronics, recovery, and sequencing;
and (4) transportation and handling, schedules and testing, and
standards and specifications. This action assured continuity of effort
in monitoring the McDonnell contract. Also, this office arranged and
coordinated meetings with McDonnell personnel and served as a clearing
house for all NASA-McDonnell contracts. The committee, of course,
received a majority of its data from technical sources within the
formal Space Task Group organization.
Memo, Robert R. Gilruth to Space Task Group Division,
Branch, and Section Chiefs and Heads, subject: Capsule Coordination
Office, June 19, 1959; Summary of the Method of Monitoring the
McDonnell Capsule Contract, prepared by Space Task Group, July 10,
1959.
A Capsule Review Board was established to review, at regular
intervals, action taken by the Capsule Coordination Office. Paul E.
Purser was appointed chairman, with division heads, Coordination Office
head, and Project and Assistant Project Directors serving as members.
Memo, Robert R. Gilruth to Space Task Group Division,
Branch, and Section Chiefs and Heads, subject: Organization of Capsule
Coordination Office, June 19, 1959.
June 24
Against an original estimated cost of $15.5 million for eight Redstone
launch vehicles in support of Project Mercury, the final negotiated
figure was $20.1 million.
Chart, Revised Funding HS-44, Project Mercury
(Redstone) prepared by Control Office, Army Ballistic Missile Agency,
June 24, 1959.
June 25
Navy surface vessels and aircraft were used in a recovery operation
after an airdrop of a spacecraft off the coast from Jacksonville,
Florida. The spacecraft was purposely dropped 40 miles away from the
predicted impact point and 45 miles away from the nearest ship.
Recovery was effected in 2 and one half hours.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 3 for Period Ending July 31, 1959.
June 28
Between the cited date and July 11, 1959, 12 heat-transfer tests were
made in the Preflight Jet Test facility at Wallops Island on several
ablation materials being considered for use on the spacecraft afterbody
(not heat shield) for the Little Joe flights. Test conditions simulated
those of actual Little Joe trajectories. Of the materials used,
triester polymer and thermolag demonstrated the capability to protect
the spacecraft against expected heat loads.
Memo, Howard S. Carter to Associate Director, NASA
Langley, subject: Progress for June 28-July 11, 1959, on Langley
Support of Project Mercury, July 15, 1959.
June 29
A longitudinal static stability investigation was carried out for the
Mercury manned orbital spacecraft model in the 16-foot transonic
circuit at the Arnold Engineering Development Center.
History of Arnold Engineering Development Center,
January-June 1959, Vol. I, pp. 38-41.
June (during the month)
The Space Task Group furnished several boilerplate spacecraft to
DesFlotFour (naval unit involved in Project Mercury recovery plans) for
use in developing detailed recovery techniques. (See fig. 17.)
Memo, Howard S. Carter to Associate Director, NASA
Langley, subject: Progress for June 14-27, 1959, on Langley Support of
Project Mercury, June 30, 1959.
McDonnell selected Northrop as the subcontractor to design and
fabricate the landing system for Project Mercury. Northrop technology
for landing and recovery systems dated back to 1943 when that company
developed the first parachute recovery system for pilotless aircraft.
For Project Mercury, Northrop developed the 63-foot ring-sail main
parachute. (See fig. 18.)
Material supplied by Jerome Ringer, Public Relations
Department, Northrop Ventura, Jan. 1963.
 |  |
Figure 17. Recovery test spacecraft
showing recovery aids. |
Figure 18. Main 63-foot ringsail parachute. |
July 1
The order for Jupiter launch vehicles in support of Project Mercury was
canceled because the same or better data could be obtained from Atlas
flights.
Memo, Abe Silverstein, Director of Space Flight
Development, NASA Hq., to Langley Space Task Group, subject:
Cancellation of Mercury-Jupiter Program, July 1, 1959.
July 1-2
A pressure suit compatibility evaluation in the Mercury spacecraft
mock-up was performed in suits submitted by the David Clark Company, B.
F. Goodrich Company, and International Latex Company. Four subjects
participated in the tests.
McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, subject: Project
Mercury Engineering Status Report, June 1 to August 1, 1959.
July 6
As a result of a discussion between Maxime A. Faget, Space Task Group,
and John E. Naugle, Space Science Division, NASA Headquarters, it was
concluded that there were several important scientific experiments in
the field of energetic particles research that could be performed by
placing packets of emulsion within the Mercury spacecraft. Work was
started to determine a suitable packet location, along with other
details associated with conducting such experiments.
Memo, John W. Townsend, Jr., Assistant Director,
Space Science and Satellite Applications, NASA Hq., to Robert R.
Gilruth, Director of Project Mercury, subject: Energetic Particle
Research—Project Mercury, July 6, 1959.
Results of the technical and management evaluations of Mercury
tracking network propsals were presented to the Langley Research Center
Source Selection Board.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 3 for Period Ending July 31, 1959.
July 12
An agreement was made with the Air Force for Space Task Group to place
microphone pickups on the skin of the Atlas launch vehicle as a part of
the instrumentation to measure noise level during the Big Joe-Atlas
launching. Distribution of the microphones was as follows: one inside
the Mercury spacecraft, three externally about midway of the launch
vehicle, and one on the Atlas skirt.
Letter, Charles J. Donlan, Associate Director of
Project Mercury, to R. W. Costin, Bostrom Research Laboratories (no
subject) July 29, 1960, with inclosures.
July 13
Spacecraft horizon scanner qualification tests were started.
McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, subject: Project
Mercury Engineering Status Report, June 1 to August 1, 1959.
The Western Electric Company and associates were announced as winner
of the competition for construction of the Mercury tracking network.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 3 for Period Ending July 31, 1959.
July 20
Negotiations for construction of the Mercury tracking network were
started with the Western Electric Company and their subcontractors
(Bendix Aviation, International Business Machines, Bell Telephone
Laboratories, and Burns and Roe), and a letter contract was signed on
July 30, 1959, for the entire range. This included radar tracking;
telemetry receiving, recording, and display; communications to both the
spacecraft and surface stations; and the computing and control
facilities.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 3 for Period Ending July 31, 1959.
The Space Task Group forwarded Big Joe postflight requirements to
Pan American personnel at the Atlantic Missile Range for use in
preparing their documents concerning postflight handling of the Mercury
special test spacecraft.
Letter, Robert R. Gilruth, Director of Project
Mercury, to B. Porter Brown, NASA Atlas-Mercury Test Coordinator (no
subject), July 20, 1959, with inclosures.
July 21
Alterations to Building “S” at Cape Canaveral for Project Mercury
support were discussed in a meeting at Cape Canaveral. (See fig. 19.) A
target date of December 1, 1959, was set for project completion.
Therefore, this meant that Vanguard activities would have to be phased
out of the building.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 3 for Period Ending July 31, 1959.
 |
Figure 19. White room
in Hanger S at Cape Canaveral. |
July 22
The B. F. Goodrich Company was selected as the contractor to design and
develop the Mercury astronaut pressure suit. Company technology in this
field dated back to 1934, when it developed the first rubber
stratosphere flying suit for attempts at setting altitude records.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 3 for Period Ending July 31, 1959.
A successful pad abort flight of a boilerplate spacecraft with a
production version of the escape tower and rocket was made. (See fig.
20.) The escape rocket motor was manufactured by Grand Central Rocket,
and the flight was the first operational test of this component.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 3 for Period Ending July 31, 1959.
The Space Task Group, McDonnell, and the Air Force Chart and
Information Center held a meeting with regard to a map depicting
Mercury spacecraft flight. At that time, it was decided that the chart
would cover an area of 40 degrees latitude above and below the equator.
The chart would show oceans and continents by colors to match probable
visual characteristics. Orbit numbers and time since launch would be
depicted and traced.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 3 for Period Ending July 31, 1959.
The Navy provided NASA with a list of reserve ships that might be
used in direct support of Project Mercury, and on July 28, 1959,
specific information was forwarded on ships that NASA might be
interested in using.
Letter, M. J. Luosey, Department of Navy, to NASA
Langley Research Center (no subject), received July 28, 1959.
 |
Figure 20. Spacecraft
with McDonnell designed escape system ready for firing at Wallops
Island. |
July 28
A boilerplate spacecraft, instrumented to measure sound pressure level
and vibration, was launched in the second beach abort test leading to
the Little Joe test series. The purpose of the instrumentation was to
obtain measurement of the vibration and sound environment encountered
on the capsule during the firing of the Grand Central abort rocket.
Memo, Charles A. Hardesty to NASA Langley IRD files,
subject: Sound Measurements on the Second Beach Abort Test on the
Little Joe Capsule, Oct. 9, 1959.
July 30
Letter Contract NASA 1-430 was awarded to the Western Electric Company
for construction of the Mercury tracking and ground instrumentation
system. (See July 20, 1959 entry.)
Memo, Sherwood L. Butler, Langley to NASA
Headquarters, Code: BR, subject: Monthly Status Report—Project
Mercury, Nov. 3, 1959.
July 31
Personnel from the Aeromedical Field Laboratory inspected the first
animal couch fabricated by McDonnell to be used in the Mercury animal
flight program. The objective of the animal program was to provide
verification of successful space flight prior to manned missions; to
aquire data on physical and mental demands which will be encountered by
the astronauts during space flight; to provide dynamic test of
technical procedures and training for support personnel in handling the
aeromedical program for manned flight; and to evaluate spacecraft
environmental control systems and bioinstrumentation under flight
conditions.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 3 for Period Ending July 31, 1959.
July (during the month)
The Mercury astronauts completed disorientation flights on the
three-axis space simulator at the Lewis Research Center.
McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, Project Mercury
Bi-Monthly Capsule Manufacturing and Tooling Report, August 1, 1959 to
October 1, 1959, p. 22.
Minneapolis-Honeywell delivered the first automatic stabilization
and control system for the Mercury spacecraft to McDonnell. (See fig.
21.)
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 3 for Period Ending July 31, 1959.
The Pilotless Aircraft Research Division of the Langley Research
Center launched a 1/14th-scale model of the Mercury spacecraft at
Wallops Island to a speed of Mach 3.5 and at an altitude of 40,000
feet. The model spacecraft went into a continuous tumble from
separation to landing.
Memo, Howard S. Carter to Associate Director, NASA
Langley, subject: Progress for June 28-July 11, 1959, on Langley
Support of Project Mercury, July 15, 1959.
Specialty assignments were made to each of the Mercury astronauts.
Thus they became participating members in the NASA-McDonnell
coordination meetings and the Mercury-Redstone or Mercury-Atlas
meetings in their specialty area. Assignments were as follows: Scott
Carpenter, navigation and navigational aids; Gordon Cooper, Redstone
launch vehicle; John Glenn, crew space layout; Virgil Grissom,
automatic and manual attitude control system; Walter Schirra,
life-support system; Alan Shepard, tracking and recovery operations;
and Donald Slayton, Atlas launch vehicle.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 3 for Period Ending July 31, 1959.
A three-axis hand controller and a pilot restraint system were
delivered to NASA at the Johnsville centrifuge for use in the Mercury
astronaut training program.
McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, Project Mercury
Bi-Monthly Engineering Status Report, August 1, 1959 to October 1, 1959, p. 22.
 |
Figure 21. Spacecraft
reaction control system. |
August 3
Major General Donald N. Yates was appointed as the Department of
Defense representative for Project Mercury support operations.
Information supplied by Major General Leighton Davis'
Office, April 1963.
August 4
Tests were started to check the operation of the redesigned Mercury
drogue parachute. (See figs. 22 and 23.)
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 4 for Period Ending October 31, 1959.
 |
Figure 22. Vehicle for
drogue parachute test at NASA Flight Research Center. |
Figure 23. Flight plan for drogue parachute tests at NASA
Flight Research Center. |
August 6
Four F-102 aircraft were made available for use by the Mercury
astronauts to maintain proficiency in high performance vehicles.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Director of Space
Flight Development, subject: Interim Status Report for Project Mercury,
Aug. 7, 1959.
August 14
NASA Headquarters approved a Space Task Group proposal that
negotiations be undertaken with McDonnell for the fabrication of six
additional Mercury spacecarft.
Memo, NASA Hq. to Langley Space Task Group, subject:
Additional Capsules for Project Mercury, Sept. 9, 1959.
August 15
The astronauts began their initial centrifuge training at the Aviation
Medical Acceleration Laboratory. During the first part of the month
Space Task Group personnel had installed and checked out Mercury
spacecraft simulation equipment at the Aviation Medical Acceleration
Laboratory in preparation for the astronaut centrifuge training
program.
Memo, Dr. W. S. Augerson, Life Systems Branch, to
Chief, Flight Systems Division, Space Task Group, subject: Trip Report,
Sept. 15, 1959.
August 21
During the countdown of the first programed Little Joe launching (LJ-1
beach abort test) at Wallops Island, the escape rocket fired
prematurely 31 minutes before the scheduled launch. The spacecraft rose
to an altitude of 2,000 feet and landed about 2,000 feet from the
launch site. Premature firing was caused by a faulty escape circuit.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 4 for Period Ending October 31, 1959.
August 25
Testing was completed to check the effectiveness of the drogue
parachute as a stabilizing device. The drogue parachute was fully
qualified for deployment at speeds up to Mach 1.5 and altitudes of up
to 70,000 feet. Ordinarily, during the operational phase of Project
Mercury the drogue parachute was deployed at 40,000 feet, so the
component well met operational requirements.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 4 for Period Ending October 31, 1959.
August 28
NASA Headquarters authorized the Space Task Group to enter into
negotiations with the Air Force Ballistic Missile Division for the
procurement of additional Atlas launch vehicles in support of Project
Mercury. The authorization was to be incorporated into Contract No.
HS-36.
Memo, Warren J. North, Chief, Manned Satellite to
Director, Space Flight Development, subject: Purchase Approval for Four
Mercury Atlas Boosters, October 13, 1959.
August (during the month)
Qualification tests, which were started in May 1959, were completed for
the 63-foot ringsail, main parachute. After this, complete parachute
landing tests were initiated by spacecraft drops from a C-130 at Salton
Sea, California.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 4 for Period Ending October 31, 1959.
McDonnell submitted its first monthly reliability report. The
purpose of this report was to summarize the reliability efforts of
McDonnell and its subcontractors in the design and development of the
Mercury spacecraft.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 3 for Period Ending July 31, 1959.
September 1-7
McDonnell moved a segment of its Mercury effort to Cape Canaveral in
preparation for the operational phase of the program. Personnel were
immediately assigned to committees to develop the plans for
Mercury-Redstone and Mercury-Atlas missions. The McDonnell office was
located in Hanger S.
McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, Project Mercury
Bi-Monthly Engineering Status Report, August 1, 1959 to October 1, 1959, p. 1.
September 3
Ground rules for prelaunch preparations were forwarded by the Space
Task Group to McDonnell to serve as a guideline in the design of
Mercury checkout equipment. Items covered included blockhouse
equipment, checkout trailer, and telemetry trailer.
Letter, Space Task Group to Logan T. MacMillan,
Project Director, McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, subject: Ground
Support Equipment, Sept. 3, 1959.
September 9
A Big Joe Atlas boilerplate Mercury spacecraft model (fig. 24) was
successfully launched and flown from Cape Canaveral, although
booster-engine separation did not occur. Objectives of this test flight
were to determine the performance of the ablation shield and measure
afterbody heating; to determine the flight dynamics of the spacecraft
during reentry; to evaluate the adequacy of the spacecraft recovery
system and procedures; to familiarize operating personnel with Atlas
launch procedures; to evaluate loads on the spacecraft while in the
flight environment; to observe and evaluate the operation of the
spacecraft control system; and to recover the spacecraft. The flight
was considered to be highly successful, and a majority of the test
objectives were attained. The heat shield temperatures (reaching a peak
of 3,500 degrees F) were below those expected, but were close enough to
provide data for the engineering design of the Mercury heat shield.
Space Task Group officials were also pleased that the spacecraft could
reenter the atmosphere at high angles-of-attack and maintain its heat
shield in a forward position without using the control system. The
spacecraft was picked up by the recovery force about 8 hours after
lift-off. Because of the success of this flight, a similar launch was
considered unnecessary and accordingly was canceled.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject: Big
Joe Shot, September 9, 1959; Preliminary Data, subject: Noise
Environments for Big Joe I Test Vehicle, undated.
The Space Task Group provided McDonnell with guidance in the
development of the “Astronauts' Handbook.” Topics included such items
as a descriptive resume of normal and emergency procedures to be
followed on the check lists. The book was divided into three sections:
“The Normal Operational Procedures,” “The Emergency Operational
Procedures,” and “The Failure Analysis Procedures.”
Letter, Paul E. Purser, Space Task Group, to Logan T.
MacMillan, Project Director, McDonnell Aircraft Corporation (no
subject), Sept. 9, 1959.
 |
Figure 24. Big Joe on
launch pad at Cape Canaveral for ballistic reentry flight test.
|
September 10-11
At a spacecraft mock-up review, the astronauts submitted several
recommended changes which involved a new instrument panel (fig. 25), a
forward centerline window, and an explosive side egress hatch.
McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, Project Mercury
Bi-Monthly Engineering Status Report, August 1, 1959 to October 1, 1959, p. 23.
Figure 25. Spacecraft instrument control panel. |
September 11
After a preliminary study of the Mercury environment with regard to
astronaut food and water requirements, Dr. Douglas H. K. Lee estimated
that water use would be in the order of 500 cu cm/hr and that the
caloric intake per day would be about 3,200 calories of food. Dr. Lee
was a member of the Natick Quartermasters Research and Engineering
Laboratory.
Memo, Dr. W. S. Augerson, Life Systems Branch, to
Chief Flight Systems Division, Space Task Group, subject: Trip Report,
Sept. 11, 1959.
September 15
Walter C. Williams was appointed Associate Director for Project Mercury
Operations, and also the prime NASA-Department of Defense contact for
Mercury flight operations.
Information supplied from Personnel Records by
Kathryn Walker, Personnel Division, Manned Spacecraft Center, March
1963.
September 16
The Langley Research Center was in the process of conducting ablation
heat-shield tests on nine model shields in support of Project Mercury.
However, the Big Joe test of the week before demonstrated the
feasibility of the ablation heat-shield concept for reentry and
verified the suitability of the materials selected for such purposes.
Memo, Robert L. O'Neal to Chief, Flight Systems
Division, Space Task Group, subject: Progress to Date on Ablation Tests
in Support of Project Mercury, Sept. 16, 1959.
September 19
An air launch of a Mark II parachute (drogue) test vehicle was
conducted by the NASA Flight Research Center. This test, the 15th in
the series, concluded the Project Mercury drogue parachute development
and qualification tests.
Memo, Flight Research Center to NASA Hq., subject:
Final Project Mercury Status Report, Sept. 19, 1959, Oct. 5, 1959, with
inclosures.
September 21
Between this date and October 10, 1959, a research program was carried
out by the Aviation Medical Acceleration Laboratory to measure the
effects of sustained acceleration on the pilot's ability to control a
vehicle. Various side-arm controllers were used, and it appeared that
the three-axis type (yaw, roll, and pitch) was the most satisfactory.
(See fig. 26.) Later this configuration was extensively evaluated and
adopted for use in the control system of the Mercury spacecraft.
Memo, Brent Y. Creer and Rodney C. Wingrove to
Director, NASA Ames, subject: Preliminary Results of Pilot's Side-Arm
Controller Tests Conducted on the AMAL-NAOC Centrifuge, Johnsville,
Pennsylvania, February 26, 1960.
 |
Figure 26. Three-axis
hand controller. |
September 22
A paper was issued covering “Results of Studies Made to Determine
Required Retrorocket Capability.” The intent of this study was to
provide for pilot safety for landing during any emergency condition, as
well as at the end of a normal mission.
NASA Project Mercury Working Paper 102, Sept. 22,
1959.
September (during the month)
An operational analysis study report of possible recovery forces
required for a three-orbit Mercury mission was received from the
Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corporation. By using this document, the
Space Task Group was continuing to refine recovery requirements for all
Mercury flights. This work involved the development of a satisfactory
helicopter recovery technique and the conduct of tests to determine
optimum spacecraft location aids.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 4 for Period Ending October 31, 1959.
October 1
On this date, funds were approved by NASA Headquarters for the
following major changes to the Mercury spacecraft: egress hatch
installation (CCP-58-1), astronaut observation window installation
(CCP-73); rate stabilization and control system (CCP-61-2), main
instrument and panel redesign (CCP-76), installation of reefed ringsail
landing parachute (CCP-41), and nonspecification configurations of
spacecraft (CCP-8). With reference to the last item, the original
contract with McDonnell had specified only one spacecraft
configuration, but the various research and development flight tests
required changes in the configuration.
Memo, George Low to NASA Director of Space Flight
Development, subject: Budgetary Approval of Proposed Project Mercury
Procurement, Oct. 1, 1959.
October 2
Specifications for the Mercury pressure suit were issued. The suit
procurement program was divided into two phases: Phase I, operational
research suits which could be used for astronaut training, system
evaluation, and further suit development; and Phase II, Mercury
pressure suits in the final configuration.
Memo, Space Task Group to Langley Research Center,
Attn: Procurement Officer, subject: Project Mercury Astronaut Pressure
Suit Procurement, Oct. 2, 1959, with inclosures.
October 4
A Little Joe launch vehicle carrying a boilerplate spacecraft (LJ-6)
was successfully launched from Wallops Island. Objectives of the flight
were to check the integrity of the launch vehicle airframe and motor
system, check the operations of the launcher, to check the validity of
the calculated wind corrections, to obtain performance and drag data,
and to check the operation of the destruct system. The flight, lasting
5 minutes 10 seconds, gained a peak altitude of 37.12 statute miles,
and a range of 79.4 statute miles. The destruct packages carried on
board the Little Joe launch vehicles were successfully initiated well
after the flight had reached its apex. There was a slight malfunction
in the Little Joe launch vehicle when ignition of the two second-stage
Pollux motors fired before the exact time planned. Actually, the
planned trajectory was little affected and the structural test of the
vehicle, really greater than planned, was benefited.
NASA Release No. 59-235, subject: NASA Conducts
Little Joe Test Launch, Oct. 4, 1959; Memo, George Low to NASA
Administrator, subject: First Little Joe Launching, Oct. 5, 1959.
October 13
Explorer VII achieved orbit on this date and began providing
significant geophysical information on solar and earth radiation,
magnetic storms, and micrometeorite penetration. This satellite also
successfully demonstrated a method of controlling internal
temperatures.
Goddard Space Flight Center Chart, Satellites and
Space Probe Projects as of July 1962.
October 15
Space Task Group personnel held a meeting at Langley with
representatives from the Lewis Research Center to clarify Project
Mercury research support needs at Lewis. During the course of
discussion, several test and support areas were agreed upon. As an
example, Lewis would conduct separation tests in which full-scale
hardware was used to determine if a satisfactory separation existed. In
these tests separation would occur when the posigrade rockets were
fired after burnout of the Atlas during an ordinary mission. Lewis
would seek to determine if there were any harmful effects due to flame
impingement either on the Atlas booster or on the wiring of the
retrograde package. In addition, Lewis would determine the actual
effective impulse of the posigrade rockets during separation. Lewis
also agreed to support Space Task Group in developing pilot techniques
in a special tunnel at Lewis. The objectives were to determine a
pilot's capability to stabilize spacecraft attitudes in space. Lewis
had a large gimballed system in the tunnel that would simulate the
motions of space conditions, but in a sea-level environment. It was
thought, however, that experience in the gamballed system would be
beneficial to the pilots. A third area of support involved retrorocket
calibration tests. At that time, Space Task Group was concerned that
when the retrorockets were fired, the spacecraft would be considerably
upset while in orbital flight. Lewis would use its high-altitude tunnel
at maximum capability to determine the extent of the upset and assist
in devising means to control the situation. Lewis also agreed to check
the hydrogen-peroxide-fueled control system to obtain starting and
performance characteristics of the reaction jets. In the last area of
this series of studies and tests, Lewis was to study the escape rocket
plume when the rocket was fired at high altitudes to determine the
effect of the plume on the spacecraft. It was believed that the plume
would completely envelop the spacecraft.
Memo, Maxime A. Faget, Chief, Flight Systems Division
to Project Director, subject: Status of Test Work Being Conducted at
the Lewis Research Center in Conjuction with Project Mercury, Oct. 22,
1959.
October 20
Requests were initiated to test the Mercury spacecraft afterbody
shingles at the Navy's Dangerfield test facility for heat resistance
and dynamic-pressure capabilities.
Memo, George Low, Chief, Manned Space Flight to NASA
Director of Space Flight Development, subject: Tests of Project Mercury
Shingle Structure, Oct. 20, 1959.
October 30
A meeting of Space Task Group, Wallops Station, and McDonnell personnel
was held to review and evaluate Mercury escape-system
qualification-test results. In the continuing efforts of this activity,
the responsibility in attaining test objectives was apportioned among
the three organizations.
Project Mercury, Minutes of Meeting, subject: Escape
System Qualification Test, Oct. 30, 1959.
October (during the month)
North American Aviation and Minneapolis-Honeywell were notified to
proceed with the production of hardware for an air-supplied
launch-vehicle control system.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 4 for Period Ending October 31, 1959.
McDonnell received the first ablative heat shield (fig. 27),
designated for installation on Spacecraft No. 1. This particular heat
shield was based on the Big Joe design, and was manufactured by General
Electric.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 4 for Period Ending October 31, 1959.
 |
Figure 27. Mercury
spacecraft heat shield after recovery. |
November 1
The “Handbook of Operation and Service Instructions, Horizon Scanner
Test, Serial MDE 4590011” was published. This document was revised and
reissued on June 6, 1960.
McDonnell Report SEDR-120, Handbook of Operation
and Service Instructions, Horizon Scanner Test Set MDE 4590011,
Contract NAS 5-59, June 6, 1960.
November 4
Little Joe 1-A (LJ-1A) was launched in a test for a planned abort under
high aerodynamic load conditions. This flight was a repeat of the
Little Joe (LJ-1) that had been planned for August 21, 1959 (escape
rocket fired 31 min before the intended launch of the Little Joe launch
vehicle). After lift-off, the pressure sensing system was to supply a
signal when the intended abort dynamic pressure was reached (about 30
sec after launch). An electrical impulse was then sent to the explosive
bolts to separate the spacecraft from the launch vehicle. Up to this
point, the operation went as planned, but the impulse was also designed
to start the igniter in the escape motor. The igniter activated, but
pressure failed to build up in the motor until a number of seconds had
elapsed. Thus the abort maneuver, the prime mission of the flight, was
accomplished at a dynamic pressure that was too low. For this reason a
repeat of the test was planned. All other events from the launch
through recovery occurred without incident. The flight attained an
altitude of 9 statute miles, a range of 11.5 statute miles, and a speed
of 2,021.6 miles per hour.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
November 5
The astronauts were fitted with pressure suits and indoctrinated as to
use at the B. F. Goodrich Company, Akron, Ohio.
Memo, L. N. McMillian to Chief, Flight Systems
Division, Space Task Group, subject: Trip Report, Nov. 17, 1959.
November 8
Between this date and December 5, 1959, the tentative design and layout
of the Mercury Control Center to be used to monitor the orbiting flight
of the Mercury spacecraft were completed. The control center would have
trend charts to indicate the astronaut's condition and world map
displays to keep continuous track of the Mercury spacecraft. (See fig.
28.)
Memo Howard S. Carter to Associate Director, Langley
Research Center, subject: Progress of Nov. 8-Dec. 5, 1959, on Langley
Support of Project Mercury, Dec. 8, 1959.
 |
Figure 28. Mercury
control center at Cape Canaveral. |
November 10
Space Task Group personnel visited McDonnell to monitor the molding of
the first production-type couch for the Mercury spacecraft.
Memo, Gerald J. Pesman to Chief, Flight Systems
Division, Space Task Group, subject: Visit to MAC to Monitor Molding of
First Production-Type Couch, Nov. 10, 1959.
November 12
A NASA-Department of Defense agreement was signed by NASA Administrator
T. Keith Glennan and Deputy Secretary of Defense Thomas Gates, relevant
to the principles governing reimbursement of costs incurred by NASA or
the Department of Defense in support of Project Mercury.
NASA General Management Instruction 2-3-5, Attachment
A, subject: Agreement Between the Department of Defense and the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration Concerning Principles
Governing Reimbursements of Costs, Nov. 12, 1959.
November 16-20
Wearing the Mercury pressure suits, the astronauts were familiarized
with the expected reentry heat pulse at the Navy Aircrew Equipment
Laboratory, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Memo, L. N. McMillian to Chief, Flight Systems
Division, Space Task Group, subject: Trip Report, Nov. 20, 1959.
November 20
At the fifth Mercury Coordination Meeting, the Army Ballistic Missile
Agency proposed the installation of an open-circuit television system
in the Mercury-Redstone second and third flights (MR-2 and MR-3). The
purpose of the system was to observe and relay launch vehicle and
spacecraft separation data.
Letter, Army Ballistic Missile Agency to NASA
Administrator (no subject), March 2, 1960, with TV Proposal Inclosure.
November 27
The Arnold Engineering Development Center tested the Grand Central
solid-fuel rocket motor used to propel the Mercury spacecraft escape
system. The purpose of the test was to verify altitude ignition and to
determine the combustion-chamber-pressure-time curve.
Chronology of the Arnold Engineering Development
Center; History of Arnold Engineering Development Center, July-December
1959, Vol. I, pp. 47-52.
The Air Force School of Aviation Medicine agreed to provide a
biopack experiment for the Little Joe 2 flight. Included in the pack
were track plates of barley, nerve cells from a rat, tissue culture,
and other specimens of that type.
Memo, G. D. Smith, NASA Manned Space Flight, to
files, subject: Biopack Little Joe No. 2, Nov. 30, 1959.
November (during the month)
The first manned development system tests were completed at the
AiResearch Manufacturing Division, Garrett Corporation. Tests were
conducted in the altitude chamber to determine proper functioning of
all system valves and components. A McDonnell subject was clothed in a
Mercury-type presure suit for these tests. Preliminary data from these
tests indicated that the system functioned satisfactorily.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
Between November 1959 and January 1960, 10 developmental
full-pressure suits were delivered to the astronauts and other
subjects. These suits were used in various Mercury training and
development programs. (See Oct. 2, 1959 entry). Several problem areas
were denoted. One involved stretching which complicated the suit
mobility problem. This matter was being investigated, and one of the
solutions was felt to be undersizing to allow for a suit growth factor.
In addition, modifications would have to be made in suit insulation to
provide for better pilot mobility. These problems were to be expected
in a developmental program.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
Between November 1959 and January 1960, the general design of the
Mercury couch was completed, and couches were molded for the astronauts
and medical personnel associated with the program. (See fig. 29.)
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
 |
Figure 29. Plaster
forms used in construction of research and development versions of
contour couches. |
December 4
Little Joe 2 (LJ-2) was launched from Wallops Island to determine the
motions of the spacecraft escape tower combination during a
high-altitude abort, entry dynamics without a control system,
physiological effects of acceleration on a small primate, operation of
the drogue parachute, and effectiveness of the recovery operation.
Telemetry was set up to record some 80 bits of information on the
flight. The abort sequence was initiated by timers after 59 seconds of
elapsed flight time at an altitude of about 96,000 feet and a speed of
Mach 5.5. Escape motor firing occurred as planned and the spacecraft
was whisked away at a speed of about Mach 6 to an apogee of 53.03
statute miles. All other sequences operated as planned, and spacecraft
recovery was effected in about 2 hours from lift-off. The primate
passenger, “Sam,” an American-born rhesus monkey, withstood the trip
and the recovery in good condition. All objectives of the mission were
met.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Little Joe Test No. 3, (LJ-2), December 5, 1959; NASA Space Task Group,
Project Mercury [Quarterly] Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending
January 31, 1960.
December 7
Tenney Engineering Corporation was chosen by the Space Task Group to
construct the Mercury altitude test chamber in Hanger S at Cape
Canaveral. When completed, altitude pressure would simulate 225,000
feet. The chamber, a vertical cylinder with domed ends, was 12 feet in
diameter and 14 feet high. The chamber was designed to allow a partial
spacecraft functional check in a near-vacuum environment.
Memo, Warren J. North, Chief, Manned Satellite, to
Director, Space Flight Development, subject: Request for Approval of
Project Mercury Altitude Test Facility, Dec. 8, 1959.
December 8
Two Thiokol retrorockets for the Mercury spacecraft were tested at the
Arnold Engineering Development Center engine test facility. The test
objectives were to evaluate ignition characteristics.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960; History of
Arnold Engineering Development Center, July-December 1959, Vol. I,
pp. 47-52.
December 22
The Redstone launch vehicle for the first Mercury-Redstone mission
(MR-1) was installed on the interim test stand at the Army Ballistic
Missile Agency for static testing.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
December 31
Thrust cut-off sensor reliability and qualification tests were
accepted, because of the similarity to Lockheed functional
environmental evaluation tests of similar units used in the Polaris
program. This component, fabricated by the Donner Scientific Company,
was accepted by NASA.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
At the end of the year, NASA funds in support of Project Mercury had
been obligated to the listed organizations as follows: Air Force
Ballistic Missile Division, NASA Order HS-36, Atlas launch vehicles,
$22,830,000; Army Ordnance Missile Command, NASA Order HS-44, Redstone
launch vehicles, $16,060,000; and McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, NASA
Order 5-59, Mercury spacecraft, $49,407,540.
Memo, Glenn F. Bailey to Director of Project Mercury,
subject: Obligation of Funds, December 31, 1959.
Since being awarded the Mercury contract, McDonnell had expended
942,818 man-hours in engineering; 190,731 man-hours in tooling; and
373,232 man-hours in production.
Letter, McDonnell Aircraft Corporation to Space Task
Group, subject: Contract NAS 5-59, Monthly Financial Report, Jan. 22,
1960.
The Mercury astronauts completed basic and theoretical studies of
Project Mercury in their training program and began practical
engineering studies. This phase of the program was designed to provide
a background in basic astronautical sciences, and included such
subjects as “Space Climate” and “Astronomy of the Universe.” Shortly
thereafter the astronauts began a practical training program involving
egress training, methods of arresting rapid spacecraft motions, and
familiarization with the weightless conditions of space flight.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
December (during the month)
A weightless flying training program was started by the Mercury
astronauts in the F-100 aircraft at Edwards Air Force Base, California.
Eating, drinking, and psychomotor tests were conducted while the
astronauts were in a weightless state.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
The Space Task Group approved monitoring facilities proposed by the
Stromberg-Carlson Division for the Mercury Control Center at Cape
Canaveral and Bermuda.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
In the development of the Mercury spacecraft reaction control
system, Bell Aircraft Corporation started the preliminary flight rating
test of the automatic subsystem. (See fig. 30.)
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
Figure 30. Reaction control thrust chamber. |
January 6
The Project Mercury data reduction plan was approved. Space Task
Group's study entitled “Semi-Automatic Data Reduction” had been
completed and submitted to NASA Headquarters for review on December 21,
1959.
Space Task Group Study, Semi-Automatic Data
Reduction, Dec. 21, 1959, with indorsement.
January 11
A contract (NAS 1-430) was signed by NASA and the Western Electric
Company in the amount of $33,058,690 for construction and engineering
of the Mercury tracking network.
Chart, Contract for Mercury Tracking Network, Summary
Cost by Item and Team Members, Chart undated; NASA Langley Report,
subject: Status Report, Project Mercury Tracking and Ground
Instrumentation System transmitted to NASA Headquarters, March 17,
1960.
January 15
A document entitled “Overall Plan for Department of Defense Support for
Project Mercury Operations” was reviewed and approved by NASA
Headquarters and the Space Task Group.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
Based on requirements listed in Space Task Group Working Paper No.
129, covering the Project Mercury recovery force, the Navy issued
“Operation Plan COMDESFLOTFOUR No. 1-60.” This plan provided for
recovery procedures according to specified areas and for space recovery
methods. Procedures for Mercury-Redstone and Mercury-Atlas missions
were covered.
Navy Ops Plan 1-60, subject: NASA Statement of
Recovery Requirements for Orbital Flights, Jan. 15, 1960.
Qualification tests on a programer fabricated by the Wheaton
Engineering Company for Project Mercury were started and completed by
March 28, 1960.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 6 for Period Ending April 30, 1960.
January 18
Walter C. Williams proposed the establishment of a Mercury-Redstone
Coordination Committee to monitor and coordinate activities related to
Mercury-Redstone flight tests.
Letter, Walter C. Williams, Associate Director for
Project Mercury, to Dr. Kurt H. Debus, Director, Missile Firing
Laboratory, subject: Proposal for Mercury-Redstone Coordination
Committee, Jan. 18, 1960.
A proposal was made by Walter C. Williams, Associate Director of
Project Mercury Operations, that the Mercury-Atlas flight test working
group become an official and standing coordination body. This group
brought together representation from the Space Task Group, Air Force
Ballistic Missile Division, Convair Astronautics, McDonnell Aircraft
Corporation, and the Atlantic Missile Range. Personnel from these
organizations had met informally in the past on several occasions.
Letter, Walter C. Williams, Associate Director of
Project Mercury, to Major General Donald N. Yates, Department of
Defense Representative, Project Mercury Support Operations, subject:
Mercury-Atlas Flight Test Working Group, Jan. 18, 1960.
January 19
In keeping with a concept of using certain off-the-shelf hardware items
that were available for the manufacture of Project Mercury components,
companies around London, England, were visited throughout 1959.
Potential English vendors of such items as the SARAH beacon batteries
(later chosen), miniature indicators, time delay mechanisms,
hydrogen-peroxide systems, and transducers were evaluated. A report of
the findings was submitted on the cited date.
Memo, Thomas V. Chambers to Chief of Flight Systems
Division, Space Task Group, subject: Visit to Companies in United
Kingdom, January 19, 1960.
January 21
At a meeting to draft fiscal year 1962 funding estimates, the total
purchase of Atlas launch vehicles was listed as 15, and the total
purchase of Mercury spacecraft was listed as 26.
NASA Headquarters Memo to File by John Disher,
Advanced Manned Systems, subject: Preliminary Estimates of FY 1962
Funding Requirements for Project Mercury, Jan. 21, 1960.
Little Joe 1-B (LJ-1B) was launched from Wallops Island with a
rhesus monkey, “Miss Sam,” aboard. (See fig. 31.) Test objectives for
this flight were the same as those for Little Joe 1 (LJ-1) in which the
escape tower launched 31 minutes before the planned launch, and Little
Joe 1-A (LJ-1A), wherein the dynamic buildup in the abort maneuver was
too low. A physiological study of the primate, particularly in areas
applying to the effects of the rapid onset of reverse acceleration
during abort at maximum dynamic pressure, was also made. In addition,
the Mercury helicopter recovery system was exercised. During the
mission, all sequences operated as planned; the spacecraft attained a
peak altitude of 9.3 statute miles, a range of 11.7 statute miles, and
a maximum speed of 2,021.6 miles per hour. Thirty minutes from launch
time, a Marine recovery helicopter deposited the spacecraft and its
occupant at Wallops Station. “Miss Sam” was in good condition, and all
test objectives were successfully fulfilled.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Little Joe 1-B (Test No. 4), January 21, 1960, January 22, 1960; NASA
Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly] Status Report No. 5
for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
 |
Figure 31. Rhesus
monkey, “Miss Sam,” being placed in container for LJ-1B flight.
|
January 25
McDonnell delivered the first production-type Mercury spacecraft to the
Space Task Group at Langley in less than 1 year from the signing of the
formal contract. (See fig. 32.) This spacecraft was a structural shell
and did not contain most of the internal systems that would be required
for manned space flight. After receipt, the Space Task Group
instrumented the spacecraft and designated it for the Mercury-Atlas 1
(MA-1) flight.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
 |
Figure 32. Manufacture
of Mercury spacecraft at McDonnell plant, St. Louis, Mo. |
January 31
Six chimpanzees were rated as being trained and ready to support
Mercury-Redstone or Mercury-Atlas missions. Other chimpanzees were
being shipped from Africa to enter the animal training program.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
January (during the month)
Specifications for equipment and systems to be used for the training of
the remote-site flight controllers and Mercury control center
operations personnel were forwarded to the Western Electric team. The
remote-site training was divided into two stages: off-range and
on-range. The off-range portion consisted of practice runs on a typical
set of controllers' consoles tied into an astronaut procedures trainer.
The on-range part was planned at two stations within the United States
and from here, controllers would be assigned to tracking sites for full
range rehearsals and a mission.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
NASA presented its basic communications requirements for Project
Mercury to Western Electric, and the Company's interim proposal to
satisfy these requirements was accepted in February 1960.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
Qualification tests were completed on the Mercury spacecraft pilot
cameras and instrument viewing cameras.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
February 1
Qualification tests of the Mercury spacecraft periscope were completed.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
A study was completed on the “External and Internal Noise of Space
Capsules.” This study covered the acoustic environments of missile and
space vehicles including noise generated by the rocket engines,
air-boundary layers, and on-board equipment. Data used included noise
measurements compiled from the Big Joe I and Little Joe 2 flight tests.
These tests were a part of the internal and external noise study that
had been in progress since early 1959. NASA officials were still of the
opinion that the internal noise level was too high for pilot comfort.
Space Task Group felt that data were needed on noise transmission
through an actual production-model spacecraft structure.
William H. Mayer and David A. Hilton, subject:
External and Internal Noise of Space Capsules, Feb. 1, 1960; Memo,
Harvey H. Hubbard to Associate Director, NASA Langley, subject: Noise
Measurements of Big Joe and Little Joe Mercury Vehicles, Feb. 17, 1960.
February 5
A meeting was held to relay the decision that beryllium shingles would
be used as the best heat protection material on the cylindrical section
of the Mercury spacecraft.
Minutes of Meeting, Space Task Group, subject:
Meeting at MAC on Beryllium Shingles, Feb. 11, 1960.
Final design approval test of the Mercury telemetry equipment was
completed, and reliability test of this equipment was completed on
February 27, 1960.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 7 for Period Ending July 31, 1960.
Colonel George M. Knauf of the Air Force Surgeon General's office
began the compilation of a medical-monitor training program in support
of Project Mercury. The aims of this program were to brief the monitors
on medical problems in space prior to their participation in support of
Mercury flights. Colonel Knauf is now a member of NASA Headquarters
Manned Space Flight Office.
Memo, Dr. Stanley C. White, Head, Life Systems Branch
to Chief, Flight Systems Division, Space Task Group, subject: Trip to
USAF Surgeon General's Office, Washington, D.C., on February 5, 1960,
to Discuss Early Training of Medical Monitors with Colonel Knauf, Feb.
8, 1960.
February 8
Tests were started by the Army Ballistic Missile Agency for the mission
abort sensing program to be integrated in the Mercury-Redstone phase of
Project Mercury.
Memo, Jack C. Heberlig to Chief of Flight Systems
Division, Space Task Group, subject: Mercury-Redstone Coordination
Visit to ABMA on Feb. 10, 1961, Feb. 15, 1960.
February 11
Responsibilities of the Mercury launch coordination office were
specified by the Space Task Group. A few of the listed duties included
responsibilities associated with Department of Defense support; overall
coordination of launch activities; compilation of information related
to launch support requirements; and representing Mercury at Atlas or
Redstone Flight Test Group meetings. Walter C. Williams made a proposal
for an activity along these lines on January 18, 1960.
Memo, Walter C. Williams to Space Task Group Staff,
subject: Responsibilities for Mercury Launch Coordination Office, Feb.
11, 1960.
February 12
With Project Mercury about to enter a heavy operational phase, an
operations coordination group was established at the Atlantic Missile
Range. Christopher C. Kraft, Jr. was appointed to head this group.
Memo, Walter C. Williams to Space Task Group Staff,
subject: Organization for Mercury Field Operations, Feb. 12, 1960.
February 15
Mercury spacecraft battery qualification tests were completed.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 6 for Period Ending April 30, 1960.
Mercury landing system and post-landing equipment tests were
completed. (See fig. 33.)
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 6 for Period Ending April 30, 1960.
Figure 33. Landing shock attenuation system. |
February 18
Mercury remote-site flight controllers were appointed, and training was
inaugurated by a series of Space Task Group lectures that covered
facilities, network systems, operations, and other details. In
addition, a program was established for familiarization, orientation,
and specialized instruction of the Department of Defense group of
aeromedical staff personnel designated as members of flight controller
teams.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 6 for Period Ending April 30, 1960.
February 22
Tests were completed on the Mercury spacecraft automatic stabilization
and control system.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 5 for Period Ending January 31, 1960.
February 26
The establishment of a Project Mercury tracking site in Australia was
sanctioned.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915-1960,
p. 120.
February 27
Design approval and reliability tests of the Mercury command receivers
were completed.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 7 for Period Ending July 31, 1960.
February 29
The Space Task Group placed a requirement with NASA Headquarters for
the purchase of an analog computing facility. Planned use of this
facility was to establish and verify Mercury system requirements; it
also could be used for Mercury follow-on programs such as a manned
circumlunar vehicle program and other outer space program requirements
of this nature. Cost of this facility was estimated to be $424,000.
Memo, Robert R. Gilruth, Director of Project Mercury,
to Langley Research Center, subject: Purchase of Analog Computing
Facility for Space Task Group, Feb. 29, 1960.
February (during the month)
As part of their training program, the astronauts received 2 days of
instruction in star recognition and celestial navigation presented by
Dr. James Balten at the Morehead Planetarium in Chapel Hill, North
Carolina. The purpose of this training was to assist the astronaut in
correcting spacecraft yaw drifts. Practical experience was gained in
this task by using a motorized trainer that simulated the view of the
celestial sphere through the spacecraft observation window.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 6 for Period Ending April 30, 1960.
February-April
Agreements were signed with two Spanish firms to provide communications
at the Grand Canary Island Mercury tracking site.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 6 for Period Ending April 30, 1960.
The Navy's School of Aviation Medicine modified a standard 20-man
raft in such a way that it could be placed around the base of a
floating spacecraft with impact skirt extended. When the device was
inflated, the spacecraft rode high enough in the water to permit easy
egress from the side hatch.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 6 for Period Ending April 30, 1960.
March 7-10
An indoctrination program in free-floating during weightless flight was
conducted for the astronauts at the Wright Air Development Center. (See
fig. 34.) The rear end of a C-131B aircraft was cleared and padded.
Some 90 parabolas of 12 to 15 seconds of weightlessness each were
flown. The objective was to present orientation problems of floating in
space with the eyes opened and closed. Also, the astronauts made
attempts to use tools and move weights while they were in a weightless
condition.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 6 for Period Ending April 30, 1960.
 |
Figure 34. Astronauts
in weightless flight in C-131 aircraft. |
March 9
Position titles for Project Mercury operational flights were issued.
During the flights, 15 major positions were assigned to Mercury Control
Center, 15 in the blockhouse and 2 at the launch pad area. The document
also specified the duties and responsibilities of each position.
Letter, Walter C. Williams, Associate Director,
Project Mercury, to Major General Donald N. Yates, Department of
Defense Representative, Project Mercury Support Operations, subject:
Position Titles for Operations of Project Mercury, March 9, 1960.
March 11
Pioneer V, launched as a probe of the space between Earth and Venus,
began to provide invaluable information on solar flare effects,
particle energies and distributions and magnetic phenomena. Pioneer V
continued to transmit such data until on June 26, 1960, when at a
distance of 22.5 million miles from Earth, it established a new
communications record.
Goddard Space Flight Center Chart: Satellites and
Space Probe Projects as of July 1962.
The initial payment was made to the Australian Government by the
Chase National Bank, New York City, on behalf of the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration for support of the Mercury
network.
NASA Langley Report, subject: Status Project Mercury
Tracking and Ground Instrumentation System, transmitted to NASA
Headquarters, March 17, 1960.
March 16
The Space Task Group published recovery requirements for the
Mercury-Atlas 1 (MA-1) flight test.
Letter, Walter C. Williams, Space Task Group, to
Commander, Destroyer Flotilla Four (no subject), Mar. 16, 1960.
March 19
An agreement between the United States and Spain on the Project Mercury
tracking station in the Canary Islands was announced.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915-1960,
p. 121.
March 28
Between this date and April 1, 1960, the astronauts received their
first open-water egress training in the Gulf of Mexico off the coast of
Pensacola, Florida, in cooperation with the Navy's School of Aviation
Medicine. The training was conducted in conditions of up to 10-foot
swells, and no problems were experienced. The average egress time was
about 4 minutes from a completely restrained condition in the
spacecraft to being in the life raft.
Memo, Dr. W. S. Augerson to Chief, Flight Systems
Division, Space Task Group, subject: Trip to B. F. Goodrich, Akron and
NAS, Pensacola, March 29 thru April 2, 1960, April 6, 1960.
March 29
A decision was made by NASA Headquarters that the spacecraft prelaunch
operation facility at Huntsville, Alabama, was no longer required.
Spacecraft that were designated for Mercury-Redstone missions were to
be shipped directly from McDonnell to Cape Canaveral, thereby gaining
approximately 2 months in the launch schedule.
Memo, Abe Silverstein, Director of Space Flight
Program, NASA Headquarters to Director, Marshall Space Flight Center,
subject: Mercury Capsule Prelaunch Operations at Huntsville, March 29,
1960.
March (during the month)
Qualification tests were started on the escape tower rocket. These
tests were completed at the end of July 1960. As a part of the
qualification program, three escape-rocket motors were successfully
fired on a spacecraft model at conditions corresponding to
approximately 100,000 feet altitude in the Lewis Research Center
altitude wind tunnel. One motor was tested on a four-component balance
system to determine thrust misalignment of the rocket motor. According
to test results, the rocket motor appeared to meet operational
requirements.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 6 for Period Ending April 30, 1960.
The Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff approved the
“Overall Plan for Department of Defense Support for Project Mercury
Operations” submitted by their representative, Major General Donald N.
Yates. Following this decision, the Space Task Group prepared a series
of documents to establish the required operations support. One was an
“Operations Prospectus” which set forth the management techniques by
which NASA planned to discharge its overall program responsibility in
the operations area. A second was a “Programs Requirements Document"
directed toward continuing operational support.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 6 for Period Ending April 30, 1960.
March-April
The Mercury-Atlas working panels were reorganized into four groups:
coordination, flight test, trajectory analysis, and change control.
Each panel was composed of at least one representative from NASA (Space
Task Group), McDonnell, Air Force Ballistic Missile Division, Space
Technology Laboratory, and Convair-Astronautics.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 6 for Period Ending April 30, 1960.
April 1
The first McDonnell production spacecraft was delivered to NASA at
Wallops Island for the beach-abort test.
Data Supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
Manned Spacecraft Center, April 9, 1963.
April 5
The Space Task Group notified the Ames Research Center that preliminary
planning for the modification of the Mercury spacecraft to accomplish
controlled reentry had begun, and Ames was invited to participate in
the study. Preliminary specifications for the modified spacecraft were
to be ready by the end of the month. This program was later termed
Mercury Mark II and eventually Project Gemini.
Memo, Charles J. Donlan, Associate Director of
Project Mercury, to Ames Research Center, subject: Invitation to
Participate in Preparing Specifications and Evaluation of Proposals for
a Reentry Guidance System for Lifting Mercury, April 5, 1960.
April 7
Ablation tests on nine Mercury heat shield models in the subsonic arc
tunnel at the Langley Research Center were completed. (See Sept. 16,
1959.)
Letter, NASA Space Task Group to Logan T. McMillian,
Project Manager, McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, subject: Ablation
Tests Carried Out at Langley Research Center, April 7, 1960.
April 8
Construction of an altitude facility chamber to simulate space
environment was completed in Hanger S at Cape Canaveral. The purpose of
this facility was for spacecraft checkout and astronaut training. (See
fig. 35.) Acceptance tests for this installation were completed on July
11, 1960. (See Dec. 7, 1959.)
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 6 for Period Ending April 30, 1960.
 |
Figure 35. Mercury
altitude chamber in Hanger S, Cape Canaveral. |
April 15
Qualification tests began on the Mercury spacecraft posigrade rocket.
(See fig. 36.) The first three rocket motors subjected to these tests
were successfully tested in a more stringent vibration spectrum than
that required for Mercury-Atlas 1 (MA-1), the maximum dynamic reentry
and maximum heat on afterbody test flight.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 6 for Period Ending April 30, 1960.
Qualification tests for the Mercury spacecraft retrorockets were
started. One of the main purposes of this program was the development
of a better igniter. The igniter tested was attached to the head end of
the propellant grain and coated with a pyrotechnic. Based on three
tests it appeared that the delayed ignition problem had been resolved.
Thereafter, several other tests were run until the igniter was adjudged
to be reliable.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 6 for Period Ending April 30, 1960.
 |
Figure 36. Posigrade
rocket motors. |
April 18
Fabrication of the manned environmental-control-system training
spacecraft was essentially completed and a test program on the
equipment was started at McDonnell. This test was completed on April
25, 1960.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 6 for Period Ending April 30, 1960.
April 26
Tests were completed on the maximum altitude sensor. This component was
fabricated by the Donner Scientific Company.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 7 for Period Ending July 31, 1960.
April 27
Various gamma ray detectors were carried aboard Explorer XI on its
orbital flight. These detectors found a directional flux of gamma
radiation in space and thereby provided serious evidence against one
formulation of the “steady state” cosmological theory.
Goddard Space Flight Center Chart, Satellites and
Space Probe Projects as of July 1962.
April 29
Agreements, either interim or final, were concluded for all overseas
Mercury tracking stations as of this date. Construction was proceeding
on schedule at Cape Canaveral, Bermuda, Grand Canary Islands, the
Woomera and Muchea Australian sites, and at the demonstration site on
Wallops Island, Virginia. The survey of Guaymas in Western Mexico
completed that phase of the program, but the construction was yet to be
accomplished.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 6 for Period Ending April 30, 1960.
April (during the month)
Building 575, Patrick Air Force Base, Florida, was in the process of
being refurbished for occupancy by NASA personnel in July 1960. This
building was designated for Space Task Group use in Mercury launch,
network, and data coordination.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 6 for Period Ending April 30, 1960.
May 9
McDonnell's first production spacecraft, with its escape rocket serving
as the propulsion force, was launched from Wallops Island. Designated
the beach-abort test, the objectives were a performance evaluation of
the escape system, the parachute and landing system, and recovery
operations in an off-the-pad abort situation. The test was successful.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 7 for Period Ending July 31, 1960.
May 12
The Space Task Group established a field representative office at the
McDonnell plant in St. Louis, Missouri. A technical liaison
representative, W. H. Gray, had already been assigned to the plant. A
resident systems test engineer, a resident instrumentation engineer,
and a team of inspectors were added to the staff.
Memo, Robert R. Gilruth to Space Task Group
Organizational Units, subject: Organization of NASA Participation in
CST at MAC, May 12, 1960.
May 14
The first production spacecraft, used in the beach-abort test, was
returned to the McDonnell plant for an integrity test.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 7 for Period Ending July 31, 1960.
May 15
Qualification tests for the Mercury spacecraft explosive egress hatch
were completed.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 7 for Period Ending July 31, 1960.
May 23
Spacecraft No. 4 (production number), after being instrumented and
prepared by the Space Task Group and the Langley Research Center for
flight tests, was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the first
Mercury-Atlas mission (MA-1).
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
Manned Spacecraft Center.
May (during the month)
Training classes started for 30 physicians who had been selected by the
Department of Defense to serve as medical monitors in support of
Project Mercury operations. These personnel received a 2-week
indoctrination program. The first week was spent at Cape Canaveral
where they were briefed on the medical aspects of missile operations.
The second week was spent at Space Task Group for a series of lectures
and demonstrations on spacecraft systems, astronaut medical histories,
and monitoring stations. This was followed by practice training
sessions.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 6 for Period Ending April 30, 1960.
Production of the manned space flight configuration of the Mercury
pressure suit was started. The astronauts and medical personnel who had
tested the developmental suits received in November 1959 recommended a
number of changes to increase the physical mobility of the astronaut
before the production effort began. (See fig. 37.) Evaluation of the
test suits with the suggested modifications indicated that the mobility
and suit-spacecraft compatibility had been greatly enhanced. The
stretching which once had been a problem area had been significantly
decreased.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 7 for Period Ending July 31, 1960.
McDonnell delivered the flight-pressurized couches to be used in the
animal phase of the Mercury flight test program. According to test
results, the couches appeared to be satisfactory, with the exception of
a slight sealing problem. McDonnell was attempting to resolve this
problem.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 7 for Period Ending July 31, 1960.
 |
Figure 37. Pressure
suit worn by Alan Shepard on first manned suborbital space flight.
|
May-July
During this period, two McDonnell Procedures Trainers were delivered to
NASA. Number 1, delivered on May 4, 1960, was used for astronaut
training in the management of the spacecraft systems at Langley Field
and Number 2, delivered on July 5, 1960, was installed at Cape
Canaveral, also for space flight preparations. The trainer at Langley
Field, along with other equipment, later designated flight simulator,
was moved in 1962 to Houston, Texas, location of the Manned Spacecraft
Center, the successor to the Space Task Group.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 7 for Period Ending July 31, 1960.
June 2
In considering the possible meteoroid damage to the Mercury spacecraft
in orbital flight, it was concluded by the Space Task Group that damage
likelihood was small even during periods of meteor showers. However, it
was recommended that Mercury missions not be scheduled during
forecasted shower periods.
Memo, Benjamine J. Garland to Project Director, Space
Task Group, subject: Possible Meteoroid Damage to Mercury Spacecraft,
June 2, 1960.
June 3
As of this date, the funding status of Contract NAS 5-59, Mercury
spacecraft, was $75,565,196.
Memo, Glenn F. Bailey to Space Task Group Budget
Officer, subject: Contract NAS 5-59—Status of Funding, June 3, 1960.
June 9
The United States Weather Bureau estimated that it would require
$50,000 during fiscal year 1961 in support of Project Mercury. Bureau
responsibilities included weather forecasting for Mercury launching and
recovery activities, climatological studies along the area of the
Mercury ground track, and environmental studies of specified areas.
With reference to the last item, a study was completed in early August
1960 of annual conditions along the Atlantic Missile Range including
wind velocity, visibility and cloud coverage.
Letter, U.S. Department of Commerce, Weather Bureau,
to Dr. T. Keith Glennan, (no subject), June 9, 1960; Memo, Donald C.
Cheatham to Associate Director of Project Mercury, subject: Weather in
the Cape Canaveral Area, August 11, 1960.
June 18
Atlas launch vehicle 50-D was delivered for the first Mercury-Atlas
mission (MA-1).
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
June 20
Tests were completed on the Mercury spacecraft horizon scanner. A
sandblast technique was employed in these tests, and measurements
revealed that transmissibility was reduced in direct proportion to the
area sand blasted. Tests covered 25, 50, and 75 percent of a germanium
specimen.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 7 for Period Ending July 31, 1960.
Manned tests of the Mercury environmental control system began. (See
fig. 38.) The subjects were clothed in pressure suits and subjected to
postlanding conditions for 12 hours without serious physiological
effects. The purpose of this test was to evaluate human tolerance, and
the results indicated that no modification to the system were
necessary. However, the postlanding ventilation conditions would
continue to be monitored and requirements for any modifications would
be evaluated.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 7 for Period Ending July 31, 1960.
 |
Figure 38. Mercury
environmental control system. |
June 27
As a complement to the Mercury spacecraft reliability program, a
decision was made that one production spacecraft would be withdrawn
from the operational program for extensive testing. The test
environment would involve vacuum, heat, and vibration conditions. This
test series was later designated “Project Orbit.”
Notes on Manned Space Flight Management Meeting—
NASA Headquarters, June 27-28, 1960.
June 30
Spacecraft No. 2 was delivered to the Marshall Space Flight Center,
Huntsville, Alabama, for compatibility tests with the Redstone launch
vehicle, and was shipped to Cape Canaveral on July 23, 1960.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 7 for Period Ending July 31, 1960; Data supplied
by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office, MSC.
June (during the month)
McDonnell delivered a flight-monitoring trailer to the Space Task
Group. This trailer was used at Cape Canaveral to house equipment which
provided real-time telemetry read-outs during Mercury-Redstone flights.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report Nos. 6 and 7, for Period Ending April 30, 1960 and July
31, 1960.
In the overall NASA space program, Project Mercury was the only
program which included a recovery capability. For this reason, Space
Task Group officials felt there were a number of experiments in the
science and bioscience fields that could be placed aboard Mercury
spacecraft during mission flights. An example of such experiments would
be an ultra-violet camera which would provide data to assist in the
design and development of an orbiting astronautical observatory;
another might be bio-specimens. Obviously, decisions in experiment
selections would have to be made to prevent any dilution of the primary
Mercury mission.
Notes on NASA Headquarters Manned Space Flight
Management Meeting, June 27-28, 1960.
July 7
A reporting plan for Mercury-Atlas and Mercury-Redstone missions was
issued. This document was amended on February 17, 1961, and April 10,
1961.
Memo, Robert R. Gilruth to Space Task Group Division
Chiefs Branch and Section Heads, subject: Reporting Plan for
Mercury-Atlas and Mercury-Redstone Flight Tests, July 7, 1960.
The first meeting of the Mercury Network Coordination Committee was
held at Cape Canaveral for the purpose of initiating action on existing
problem areas. Subjects under review included operational procedures,
range readiness, and other items associated with network operation
during a mission.
Minutes of Meeting, subject: Mercury Network
Coordination Committee, July 21, 1960.
July 9
Major General Leighton I. Davis was appointed Department of Defense
representative for Project Mercury support, replacing Major General
Donald N. Yates.
Information supplied by General Davis' Office, April
1963.
July 12
Beginning on this date, the astronauts underwent a five and one half
day course in “desert survival” training at the Air Training Command
Survival School, Stead Air Force Base, Nevada. The possibility of an
arid-area landing was remote but did exist. So this training was
accomplished to supply the astronaut with the confidence and ability to
survive desert conditions until recovery. The course consisted of one
and one half days of academics, one day of field demonstrations, and
three days of isolated remote-site training. Survival equipment
normally installed in the Mercury spacecraft was used to provide the
most realistic conditions.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 7 for Period Ending July 31, 1960.
July 14
Personnel strength in support of Project Mercury was 543. This included
419 assigned to the Space Task Group, and 124 personnel from the
Langley Research Center.
Memo, Paul E. Purser to Charles J. Donlan, Associate
Director of Space Task Group, subject: Study of Space Task Group
Personnel Needs for FY 1961, July 14, 1960.
July 23
Mercury spacecraft No. 2 was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the
Mercury-Redstone 1-A (MR-1A) mission.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
July 27
Mercury launch site recovery forces exercised in recovery operations
following simulated spacecraft landings off Cape Canaveral.
Coordination and control of the recovery forces were rated highly
satisfactory.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 8 for Period Ending October 31, 1960.
July 29
Mercury spacecraft No. 3 was delivered to Langley Field for a noise and
vibration test.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 7 for Period Ending July 31, 1960.
Mercury-Atlas (MA-1) was launched from Cape Canaveral with mission
objectives being to check the integrity of the spacecraft structure and
afterbody shingles for a reentry associated with a critical abort and
to evaluate the open-loop performance of the Atlas abort-sensing
instrumentation system. (See fig. 39.) The spacecraft contained no
escape system and no test subject. Standard posigrade rockets were used
to separate the spacecraft from the Atlas, but the retrorockets were
dummies. About 59 seconds after launch, the flight was terminated
because of a launch vehicle and adapter structural failure. The
spacecraft was destroyed upon impact with the water because the
recovery system was not designed to actuate under the imposed flight
conditions. Later most of the spacecraft, the booster engines, and the
liquid oxygen vent valve were recovered from the ocean floor. Since
none of the primary flight objectives was achieved, Mercury-Atlas 2
(MA-2) was planned to fulfill the mission.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Mercury-Atlas 1, Post Launch Information, July 29, 1960; NASA Space
Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly] Status Report No. 7 for
Period Ending July 31, 1960.
 |
Figure 39.
Mercury-Atlas 1. |
July (during the month)
Manufacture of the mobile-pad egress tower (cherry picker) was
completed (fig. 40), and the vehicle was delivered to Cape Canaveral on
October 24, 1960.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 8 for Period Ending October 31, 1960.
 |
Figure 40. Mobile pad
egress tower (Cherry picker). |
August 1
Marshall Space Flight Center published the “Final Standard Trajectory
for MR-1 (Mercury-Redstone).”
Report, MNN-M-AERO-2-60, Aug. 1, 1960.
August 3
Redstone launch vehicle No. 1 was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the
MR-1 (Mercury-Redstone).
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
August 10
The Wright Air Development Center requested that NASA Headquarters
provide the Center with pertinent working papers and reports on Project
Mercury, especially on human factor aspects, for possible application
in the X-20 Dyna Soar program.
Letter, Wright Air Development Center to NASA Hqs.,
subject: Project Mercury Technical Data for Use in Dyna Soar
Programing, Aug. 10, 1960.
August 11
Representatives of NASA, McDonnell, Ballistic Missile Division, Space
Technology Laboratories, and Convair met at Cape Canaveral and later at
Convair Astronautics (Aug. 30, 1960) to discuss the Mercury-Atlas 1
(MA-1) mission malfunction. James A. Chamberlin of the Space Task Group
was appointed chairman of a joint committee to resolve the problems and
to provide a solution prior to the Mercury-Atlas 2 (MA-2) mission. Work
accomplished at this meeting is as follows: A complete analysis of
Mercury-Atlas 1 flight data and correlation of the data with data of
all previous Atlas flights; a special dynamic load analysis; study of
vibration tests of spacecraft, adapter, and the Atlas upper tank
section; and review of wind tunnel studies of buffeting loads on
spacecraft, adapter, and the Atlas upper tank sections.
Report, subject: Atlas Mercury Failure, Examination
of Failed Parts by J. A. Kies, Aug. 30, 1960; Trip Report by Andre J.
Meyer, Jr., subject: Mercury-Atlas Failure, Aug. 30, 1960; Memo, Warren
J. North to NASA Administrator, subject: Analysis of MA-1 Malfunction,
Aug. 22, 1960.
The Mercury spacecraft landing system qualification test program was
completed. The entire qualification testing program consisted of 56
airdrops of full-scale engineering models of the Mercury spacecraft
from C-130 aircraft at various altitudes up to 30,000 feet and from
helicopters at low altitudes to simulate off-the-pad abort conditions.
This test program, under contract to Northrop, had spanned one and one
half years.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 8 for Period Ending October 31, 1960.
August 12
Weather Bureau fund estimates for Fiscal Year 1961 for support of
Project Mercury were adjusted to $180,000, but in April 1961, the
Bureau Director stated he believed that actual costs would not exceed
$150,000.
Letter, U.S. Department of Commerce, Weather Bureau,
to Robert R. Gilruth (no subject), August 12, 1960 and April 18, 1961.
August 16-18
At the design engineering inspection of spacecraft No. 7, a number of
requests for changes in the control panel area were made by the
astronauts to facilitate pilot operation. Later, meeting procedures for
design engineering inspections were standardized and conducted by a
permanent team at appropriate intervals.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 8 for Period Ending October 31, 1960.
August 26
Coordination effectiveness among organizations directly involved in the
Mercury development and test program was reviewed by the Space Task
Group at the request of NASA Headquarters. Conclusions were that the
interchange of information had been excellent. The coordination panel
meetings were cited as a fine medium for information exchange. The
Mercury-Atlas Coordination Panel first met on February 19, 1959, and by
the date of the review, a total of 29 days had been spent in these
meetings. Interchange of visits had started even before the cited
February date and had been continued with good results.
Letter, Space Task Group to NASA Headquarters,
subject: Project Mercury Coordination between NASA-MAC and
BMD-STL-Convair, Aug. 26, 1960.
August (during the month)
Astronaut side-hatch-egress training was completed with no difficulties
encountered. The astronauts later received refresher training prior to
mission flights. In fact, during the refresher phases, better
procedures were developed. An example was the helicopter mode in which
a line was attached to the top of the spacecraft and the spacecraft was
partially raised by the helicopter. Then, the astronaut emerged from
the side egress hatch and was raised by a second line to the
helicopter. (See fig. 41)
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 8 for Period Ending October 31, 1960.
The astronauts were briefed on the Tiros weather satellite project
as a means providing them with information that could be used to
recognize and report on weather phenomena during orbital flight.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 8 for Period Ending October 31, 1960.
The first phase of the program in which boilerplate spacecraft with
impact skirts were dropped by helicopters on water and land surfaces
was completed. These tests were performed to investigate spacecraft
dynamics, effects of parachute restraint and release time on spacecraft
dynamics, and to determine maximum landing decelerations. During the
drops into the water spacecraft water stability was shown to be
unacceptable, because a portion of the spacecraft cylindrical section
remained under water. McDonnell immediately investigated this problem
and performed such experiments as redistribution of weight to obtain
center-of-gravity positions which were acceptable but yet provided
satisfactory flotation characteristics. Space Task Group was
investigating the possibility of extending the heat shield from the
remainder of the spacecraft and thereby creating a greater stabilizing
moment. Results from the drops on land appeared to be acceptable
because of the relatively low decelerations and the overall low
probability of a landing on land.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 8 for Period Ending October 31, 1960.
Tests conducted by Space Task Group personnel proved fluorescein
green dye dispersed from a floating disc-shaped canister was superior
to other products for this phase of Mercury recovery operations. This
material had been used previously, but it had been briefly discarded in
favor of an aluminium-colored dye. However, the new type proved to be
unsatisfactory and the use of the green dye marker was resumed.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 8 for Period Ending October 31, 1960.
 |
Figure 41. Mercury
spacecraft and astronaut Shepard being recovered by Marine Corps
helicopter. |
August 1960 to February 1961
Because of the failure of the Big Joe Atlas test flight and the
Mercury-Atlas 1 (MA-1) flight to attain all its mission objectives, the
overall Mercury-Atlas program underwent an exhaustive review. In the
Big Joe firing, velocity and range had been considerably below nominal
values because the launch vehicle had failed to stage, and spacecraft
separation had been delayed because of recontact. In the Mercury-Atlas
1 flight, launch vehicle performance was normal until about 57.6
seconds of flight, and the launch vehicle was destroyed at 59 seconds.
Neither flight had sufficient instrumentation to pinpoint the exact
cause of the failures; therefore, an extensive evaluation and test
program was initiated. Meetings on these matters began immediately
among the interested parties to coordinate findings and recommendations
for solutions (for instance, Aug. 9—summary evaluation of
Mercury-Atlas 1 data at Los Angeles; Aug. 11—evaluation summary
meeting at the Atlantic Missile Range; Aug. 22—Investigation Panel
meeting at McDonnell; Sept. 9—Investigation Panel meeting at Convair
Astronautics; Sept. 14—management meeting at Atlantic Missile Range;
Sept. 26—Instrumentation and Wind Tunnel Test Conference at Space
Task Group; Oct. 3-8—Vibration Tests at McDonnell; Oct. 3-8—wind
tunnel tests at the Arnold Engineering Development Center; and Nov. 16
—test program summary at Space Task Group. During the course of these
meetings and tests, it was the considered opinion of Space Task Group
and other interested parties that the trouble had developed in the
spacecraft interface area. One of the tests involved stiffening the
adapter rings, and later tests showed that this solution was quite
satisfactory. Tests also showed there were some moderately high
stresses in the launch vehicle near a welded joint just aft of the
adapter, and this area was strengthened by adding a band stiffener,
which proved to be satisfactory. It was also decided for the upcoming
Mercury-Atlas 2 (MA-2) mission that additional instrumentation would be
integrated with the spacecraft and launch vehicle in order to define
loads on the vehicle in the interface area, to measure pressure on and
in the adapter, and to measure any undue responses in this area. Still
another decision was that the Atlas launch vehicle, commencing with
Mercury-Atlas 3 (MA-3) would be a “thick-skin” configuration. These
findings and recommendations were presented to a NASA/Air Force ad
hoc group on February 13 through 17, 1961, commonly known as the
Rhode (NASA)-Worthman (Air Force) committee. The committee studied the
Space Task Group proposals for the Atlas launch vehicle and adapter
modifications and approved the test findings and the contemplated
action.
Notes maintained by Paul E. Purser, Special Assistant
to Director, Manned Spacecraft Center, covering cited period.
September 1
The Space Task Group drafted and forwarded to McDonnell the
specification requirements for spacecraft on-board data system
instrumentation tests. McDonnell was to demonstrate the satisfactory
performance of all space communication and instrumentation systems.
Letter, Space Task Group to Walter Burke, McDonnell,
subject: Contract NAS 5-59; Proposed On-Board Data System
Instrumentation Tests, Sept. 7, 1960, with inclosures.
Mercury spacecraft No. 6 was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the
Mercury-Atlas 2 (MA-2) unmanned mission intended to gain data on
maximum dynamic pressure and maximum heat on the spacecraft afterbody.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
September 3
Aircraft telemetry requirements were deleted from the Mercury-Atlas 3
(MA-3) and Mercury-Atlas 4 (MA-4) missions, as the spacecraft had been
modified to provide telemetry transmissions from the point of main
parachute deployment to landing.
Letter, Space Task Group to Air Force Missile Test
Center, subject: T/M Aircraft to Support MA-3 and MA-4 Operations, Dec.
8, 1960.
September 9
McDonnell forwarded its plans to the Space Task Group for the spacecaft
systems tests and Cape Canaveral checkout plans for spacecraft Nos. 5
and 7. Later, spacecraft No. 7 was the first to undergo this type of
test.
Informal Memo, J. F. Yardley and G. M. Preston, Space
Task Group, to (Conference) Attendees, subject: Summary of Conclusion
Reached Regarding CST Plans and Cape Checkout Plans for Capsules 5 and
7, Sept. 9, 1960.
September 12
“Flight Test Evaluation Report, Missile 50-D", Report No. AE 60-0323,
was published. The launch vehicle was used in the unsuccessful
Mercury-Atlas 1 (MA-1) reentry test mission.
September 19
The format of subject matter coverage for the first Mercury-Redstone
postlaunch (MR-1) report was issued. This report, covering a full range
of topics related to the mission, was to be submitted within 5 days
after the launch.
Memo, Robert R. Gilruth, Director of Project Mercury
to those concerned, subject: MR-1 Postlaunch Report, Sept. 19, 1960,
with inclosures.
September 20
The Atlas launch vehicle 67-D was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the
Mercury-Atlas 2 (MA-2) reentry test mission.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
September 21
Because of poor tower separation of the production spacecraft in the
off-the-beach abort test at Wallops Island, NASA personnel at Langley
started a series of jettison rocket tests. It was found that rocket
performance had been only about 42 percent of the desired level, and
experiments were started to raise thrust effectiveness. Measures taken
included canting the motor, adding a cone to the blast shield, and, in
one instance, deleting the blast shield. Space Task Group personnel
advised McDonnell that plans were made to test a redesigned jettison
rocket nozzle, consisting of three nozzles spaced 120 degrees apart and
canted at a 30 degree angle to the rocket centerline. (See fig. 42.)
The three-nozzle effect, which produced the desired results, was
another NASA engineering contribution.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 8 for Period Ending October 31, 1960.
The astronauts received weightless training in a modified C-135 jet
aircraft. This was the third type of aircraft used by the astronauts in
such training. The previously mentioned F-100 provided a weightless
period of some 40 to 50 seconds; the C-131, 15 seconds; and the C-135,
30 seconds. During the C-135 flights, the astronauts were checked for
changes in normal speech and their ability to control a tracking
problem while undergoing moderate g-loads prior to entering the
weightless periods.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 8 for Period Ending October 31, 1960.
Figure 42. Tower jettison rocket motor. |
September 26
The roll-out inspection of Atlas launch vehicle 77-D was conducted at
Convair-Astronautics. This launch vehicle was allocated for the
Mercury-Atlas 3 (MA-3) mission, but was later canceled and Atlas
booster 100-D was used instead.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 8 for Period Ending October 31, 1960; Data
supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office, MSC.
September 27
Mercury spacecraft No. 3, initially delivered to Langley on July 29,
1959, for a noise and vibration test, was erected at the Wallops Island
launch site for the Little Joe 5 (LJ-5).
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
September 30
Mercury spacecraft No. 5 was delivered to the Marshall Space Flight
Center for booster compatibility checks, and was shipped to Cape
Canaveral on October 11, 1960, for the Mercury-Redstone 2 (MR-2)
ballistic-primate (Ham) mission.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
September (during the month)
Flight-type pressure suits were received from the B. F. Goodrich
Company and were immediately used on the human centrifuge to assist in
determining final adjustments that were necessary in preparation for
manned space flight.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 8 for Period Ending October 31, 1960.
October 3-21
The third centrifuge training program was conducted for the astronauts
at the Aviation Medical Acceleration Laboratory. This was considered
the final major centrifuge training preparation for the first manned
Mercury-Redstone flight. No difficulties were encountered; a decided
improvement in the performance of 3-axis hand-controller tasks by the
astronauts was noted. The Mercury-Redstone 3 (MR-3) flight activities
were adhered to as closely as possible—actual spacecraft couches were
used, a production hand-controller assembly was installed, the latest
model pressure suits were worn, and the environmental control system
was equipped with a freon coolant. Failures in spacecraft sequencing
were introduced which required the astronaut to initiate an appropriate
manual override.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 8 for Period Ending October 31, 1960.
October 13-14
DESFLOTFOUR personnel, designated previously by the Department of
Defense to provide recovery support for Project Mercury, conducted a
communications exercise in the recovery room of Mercury Control Center.
This was the first time these communication facilities had been used
since the installation of the equipment. During the exercise, voice and
continuous-wave communications were established with two destroyers 120
miles at sea. The purpose of this successful exercise was to acquaint
personnel with equipment layout and communication procedures.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 8 for Period Ending October 31, 1960.
October 17
A Project Mercury weather support group was established in the Office
of Meteorological Research of the United States Weather Bureau at the
request of NASA.
Emme, Aeronautics and Astronautics: 1915-1960,
p. 129.
James Carter of the Marshall Space Flight Center submitted a study
on “Crew Support Equipment.” This type of equipment was defined as that
which is not an integral part of or attached to a space vehicle or
space station. Specific equipment categories discussed in the report
included personal safety, recovery, survival, food supplies, portable
respiratory devices, and hand tools.
Report, MTP-M-FPO-1-60, Marshall Space Flight Center,
subject: Crew Support Equipment, Oct. 17, 1960.
October 18
The spacecraft checkout facility at Marshall Space Flight Center was
transferred to Cape Canaveral.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Director of Space
Flight Programs, subject: Significant Items Within Mercury Program
Management Chart, Oct. 18, 1960.
Mission rules for Mercury-Redstone 1 (MR-1) were issued. A revision
was published on Nov. 1, 1960.
Project Mercury, MCC MR-1, subject: Project Mercury
Control Center Operations, and Flight Control Procedures and Countdown,
Oct. 18, 1960.
October 31
Space Task Group officials presented the status of qualification and
reliability activities for Project Mercury to Dr. T. Keith Glennan,
NASA Administrator.
Memo, George Low to NASA Director of Program and
Analysis Control, subject: Project Mercury Briefing, Oct. 31, 1960.
November 1
The Goddard Space Flight Center computing and communications center
became operational. Goddard's mission was to serve as a communications
center, and two IBM 7090 computers, operating in parallel, would
compute the smoothed exact position at all times during the flight,
predict future spacecraft positions, and shift the coordinates to
provide acquisition information for all observation sites. (See fig.
43.) In addition, Goddard calculated certain quantities needed for
display purposes at Cape Canaveral, Florida. The importance of the
Goddard computers was graphically demonstrated when they predicted the
amount of overshoot within seconds after landing during the
Mercury-Atlas 7 (MA-7, Carpenter) mission. This action significantly
reduced the time to find and recover the astronaut.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 9 for Period Ending January 31, 1961.
 |
Figure 43. Computers
used in Mercury orbital track at Goddard Space Flight Center.
|
November 8
Little Joe 5 (LJ-5), the first of the series with a McDonnell
production spacecraft, was launched from Wallops Island to check the
spacecraft in an abort simulating the most severe launch conditions.
The launch was normal until 15.4 seconds after lift-off, at which time
the escape rocket motor was prematurely ignited. The spacecraft did not
detach from the launch vehicle until impact and was destroyed. Failure
to attain mission objectives was attributed to several possible causes.
One of these was failure of the spacecraft-to-adpater clamp-ring limit
switches. Another possibility was failure of the escape tower
clamp-ring limit switches. And the third was improper rigging of the
limit switches in either of those locations so that vibration or
deflection could have caused switch closure. Since the test objectives
were not met, a repeat of the mission was planned.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Report On Little Joe No. 5 and Mercury-Redstone 1, Nov. 10, 1960; NASA
Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly] Status Report No. 9
for Period Ending January 31, 1961.
November 13
System checkout tests were completed on spacecraft No. 7. In the
opinion of McDonnell, the results demonstrated that this spacecraft was
adequate for a manned mission.
Memo, James T. Rose, MR-3 Assistant Project Engineer,
to W. H. Gray, Space Task Group Liaison Officer to McDonnell, subject:
General Summary of Capsule Systems Test on Capsule No. 7, Dec. 1, 1960
with inclosures.
November 16
A meeting was held at Langley Field by NASA personnel to discuss the
results of test programs which had been conducted. Of particular
interest was the estblishment of the causes for the failure of the
Mercury-Atlas 1 (MA-1) mission and to determine the status of readiness
or the Mercury-Atlas 2 (MA-2) mission. (See August 1960 to February
1961 entry.)
Minutes of Meeting, MA-2, subject: Summary of Test
Programs and Recommendations for MA-2 Launch, Nov. 16, 1960.
November 17
The Space Task Group requested that McDonnell submit a proposal for
conducting a test to determine the capability of an astronaut to make
celestial observations through the Mercury spacecraft observation
window.
Space Task Group Message PAM-0027, NASA Space Task
Group to Walter F. Burke, Vice President, McDonnell Aircraft
Corporation, subject: Project Mercury, Contract NAS 5-59, Nov. 17,
1960.
November 18
The “Standard Procedures Mercury Control Center for Flight Control and
Overall Options” was published.
Project Mercury MCC SP, Nov. 18, 1960.
Spacecraft No. 8 was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the
Mercury-Atlas 3 (MA-3) unmanned orbital mission.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
November 21
An attempt was made to launch Mercury-Redstone 1 (MR-1) from Cape
Canaveral. This unmanned mission was unsuccessful because premature
cut-off of the launch vehicle engines activated the emergency escape
system when the vehicle was only about 1 inch off the pad. Engine
cut-off was caused by premature loss of electrical ground power to the
booster. The launch vehicle settled back on the pad with only slight
damage. Since the spacecraft received a cut-off signal, the escape
tower and recovery sequence was initiated. The undamaged spacecraft was
recovered for reuse.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Attempted Launching of MR-1, Nov. 21, 1960.
November 21-30
Phase II of the helicopter spacecraft airdrop program was completed.
One of the objectives of these tests was to drop a spacecraft during
wind conditions of 18 knots, and this phase was successful. Secondary
objectives of the program were to investigate spacecraft dynamics and
water stability. Both spacecraft flotation and righting characteristics
were found to be acceptable.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 9 for Period Ending January 31, 1961.
November-December
During the Mercury-Redstone 1 (MR-1) and Mercury-Redstone 1A (MR-1A)
launches, the complete Mercury Control Center staff operated for the
first time.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 9 for Period Ending January 31, 1961.
December 1
A 16 and one half foot recovery whip antenna replaced the balloon-borne
system on the Mercury spacecraft. (See fig. 44.)
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 9 for Period Ending January 31, 1961.
McDonnell completed the fabrication of the first spacecraft orbital
timing device, and qualification tests for this component were started
immediately.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 9 for Period Ending January 31, 1961.
Figure 44. Spacecraft antennas. |
December 2
Spacecraft weight and balance values for the Mercury-Redstone 2 (MR-2)
mission were forwarded by the Space Task Group to the Marshall Space
Flight Center.
Message, NASA Space Task Group to Marshall Space
Flight Center, subject: Calculated Weight and Balance Values for
Capsule 5, MR-2, Dec. 2, 1960.
December 3
Redstone launch vehicle No. 3 was shipped to Cape Canaveral for the
Mercury-Redstone 1A (MR-1A) mission.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
December 9
Spacecraft No. 7 was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the
Mercury-Redstone 3 (MR-3) manned ballistic mission (Shepard).
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
December 14
A contract with the Waltham Precision Instrument Company for the
development of a satellite clock was canceled. Technical difficulties
were encountered in the manufacturing of the device, previously
scheduled for delivery in August 1960, and there was little assurance
that these problems could be resolved in time for the clock to be used
in any of the Mercury flights. McDonnell fabricated an orbital timing
device, which proved to be very satisfactory.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 9 for Period Ending January 31, 1961.
December 19
Mercury-Redstone 1A (MR-1A) was launched from Cape Canaveral in a
repeat of the November 21, 1960, mission and was completely successful.
This was the third attempt to accomplish the objectives established for
this flight. The first attempt on November 7, 1960, was canceled as a
result of a helium leak in the spacecraft reaction control system
relief valve, and on November 21, 1960, the mission could not be
completed because of premature cut-off of the launch vehicle engines.
Objectives of the MR-1A flight were to qualify the spacecraft for space
flight and to qualify the flight system for a primate flight scheduled
shortly thereafter. Close attention was given to the spacecraft-launch
vehicle combination as it went through the various flight sequences:
powered flight; acceleration and deceleration; performance of the
posigrade rockets; performance of the recovery system; performance of
the launch, tracking, and recovery phases of the operation; other
events of the flight including retrorocket operation in a space
environment; and operation of instrumentation. Except that the launch
vehicle cut-off velocity was slightly higher than normal, all flight
sequences were satisfactory; tower separation, spacecraft separation,
spacecraft turnaround, retrofire, retropackage jettison, and landing
system operation occurred or were controlled as planned. The spacecraft
reached a maximum altitude of 130.68 statute miles, a range of 234.8
statute miles, and a speed of 4,909.1 miles per hour. Fifteen minutes
after landing in the Atlantic Ocean, the recovery helicopter picked up
the spacecraft to complete the successful flight mission.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Mercury-Redstone 1(A) Launching, Dec. 20, 1960; NASA Space Task Group,
Project Mercury [Quarterly] Status Report No. 9 for Period Ending
January 31, 1961.
December 20
Redstone launch vehicle No. 2 was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the
Mercury-Redstone 2 (MR-2) mission (chimpanzee “Ham” flight).
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
January 3
The Space Task Group, charged by NASA to conduct Project Mercury and
other manned space-flight programs, officially became a separate NASA
field element directly under NASA Headquarters. Prior to this time, the
Space Task Group was organized under the Goddard Space Flight Center
and was administratively supported by the Langley Research Center. As
of this date, the personnel strength of Space Task Group was 667.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
January 16
The Mercury-Redstone 1A (MR-1A) postlaunch system evaluation tests were
completed at Cape Canaveral. Data disclosed that the instrumentation
system, communication system, and other components had operated
satisfactorily during the flight mission.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 9 for Period Ending January 31, 1961.
January 20
Spacecraft No. 14 was delivered to Wallops Island for the Little Joe 5A
(LJ-5A) maximum dynamic pressure abort test.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
January 31
The estimated cost of NASA Order HS-36, Atlas launch vehicles, was
$51,504,000, of which, definitive documents in the amount of
$43,671,000 had been processed as of the cited date. NASA Order HS-44
for Redstone launch vehicles was $14,918,182 and $12,534,182 had been
processed. On contract NAS 5-59, Mercury spacecraft, costs were
$79,245,952, and approximately $9.5 million of this figure was classed
as “Undefinitized Obligations.”
Memo, NASA-STG Procurement and Supply Office to NASA
Hqs., subject: Monthly Status Report, February 10, 1961.
Mercury-Redstone 2 (MR-2) was launched from Cape Canaveral, with
Ham, a 37-pound chimpanzee aboard the spacecraft. (See fig. 45.) During
the powered phase of the flight, the thrust of the propulsion system
was considerably higher than planned. In addition, the early depletion
of the liquid oxygen caused a signal that separated the spacecraft from
the launch vehicle a few seconds before planned. The over-acceleration
of the launch vehicle coupled with the velocity of the escape rocket
caused the spacecraft to attain a higher altitude and a longer range
than planned. However spacecraft recovery was effected, although there
were some leaks and the spacecraft was taking on water. Ham appeared to
be in good physiological condition, but sometime later when he was
shown the spacecraft it was visually apparent that he had no further
interest in cooperating with the space flight program. Despite the
over-acceleration factor, the flight was considered to be successful.
Memo, Warren J. North to Franklyn W. Phillips, NASA
Code A, subject: MR-2 Flight Results, February 1, 1961.
As of this date, McDonnell had expended 2,616,387 man-hours in
engineering; 383,561 man-hours in tooling, and 1,538,476 man-hours in
production in support of Project Mercury.
Letter, McDonnell Aircarft Corporation to Space Task
Group, subject: Contract NAS 5-59, Monthly Financial Report, Feb. 24,
1961.
 |
Figure 45. Chimpanzee,
“Ham,” flown in Mercury-Redstone 2 suborbital flight. |
January (during the month)
Astronaut training was centered on a close study of spacecraft systems
in final preparation for manned space flight. A series of lectures was
presented to the astronauts by the Operations Division of the Space
Task Group in this respect.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 9 for Period Ending January 31, 1961.
February 3
The Eagle-Picher Company started a 13-week life-cycle test on the
Mercury spacecraft batteries.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 10 for Period Ending April 30, 1961.
February 10
Mission rules for the Mercury-Redstone 3 (MR-3—Shepard's flight) were
published. Revisions were issued on February 27, and April 28, 1961.
Project Mercury MCC MR-3, subject: Mercury Control
Center Countdown, Flight Control and Overall Operations, Feb. 10, 1961.
Measures to be taken for hydrogen-peroxide fuel economy for the
spacecraft attitude control system were studied at a coordination
meeting. Items considered were orbital attitude, retroattitude hold
sequence, and salvo versus ripple retrorocket firing. Astronaut Virgil
Grissom reported that the salvo method had already been proven to be
unsatisfactory on the Mercury procedures trainer.
Minutes, Group III Meeting 19, subject: Project
Mercury, Project Coordination Meeting, February 10, 1961.
February 15
After his nomination by the President as Administrator of NASA on
January 30, 1961, James E. Webb was sworn into office, replacing T.
Keith Glennan.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
February 17
The Space Task Group requested that McDonnell design and install a
manual bilge pump in spacecraft No. 7 to allow the removal of any
seawater resulting from leakage after spacecraft impact.
Minutes, Group II Meeting No. 23, subject: Project
Mercury Coordination Meeting, March 8, 1961; Message PAM-0102, Space
Task Group to McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, Feb. 17, 1961.
Information was released by NASA Headquarters that Space Task Group
engineers directing Project Mercury had selected the flight trajectory
for the Mercury-Atlas 2 (MA-2) mission. This trajectory was designed to
provide the most severe reentry heating conditions which could be
encountered on an emergency abort during an orbital flight attempt. The
reentry heating rate was estimated to be 30 percent higher than a
normal Mercury orbital reentry, and temperatures were predicted to be
about 25 percent higher at certain locations on the afterbody of the
spacecraft. In addition, the deceleration g-load was calculated to be
about twice that expected for a normal reentry from orbit.
Notes by Paul Haney, NASA Hqs., subject: Mercury
Spacecraft Flight Test (MA-2), Feb. 17, 1961.
Egress hatch procedures for recovery force operations were discussed
at a coordination meeting. One suggestion involved the installation of
a pull-ring for activating the hatch explosive charge. Another proposal
was made for a paint outline of an emergency outlet that could be cut
through, if necessary.
Minutes, Project Mercury Coordination Meeting,
February 17, 1961, issued Feb. 17, 1961.
February 17-20
Spacecraft, mission, and launch vehicle flight safety rules for the
Mercury-Atlas 2 (MA-2) mission were reviewed by Space Task Group
personnel.
Mercury-Atlas 2 Mission Rules (Capsule No. 6), Feb.
17-20, 1961.
February 21
Mercury-Atlas 2 (MA-2) was launched from Cape Canaveral in a test to
check maximum heating and its effects during the worst reentry design
conditions. The flight closely matched the desired trajectory and
attained a maximum altitude of 114.04 statute miles and a range of
1,431.6 statute miles. Inspection of the spacecraft aboard the recovery
ship some 55 minutes after launch (actual flight time was 17.56
minutes) indicated that test objectives were met, since the structure
and heat protection elements appeared to be in excellent condition. The
flight control team obtained satisfactory data; and the complete launch
computing and display system, operating for the first time in a flight,
performed satisfactorily.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Preliminary MA-2 Flight Results, Feb. 23, 1961.
Astronauts John Glenn, Virgil Grissom, and Alan Shepard were
selected by the Space Task Group to begin special training for the
first manned Mercury flight.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
February 23
As of this date, the Space Task Group, Convair-Astronautics, Space
Technology Laboratories, McDonnell, and the Marshall Space Flight
Center had completed a number of extensive studies on the subject of
the safe separation of the Mercury spacecraft from the launch vehicle
during an emergency. The following papers include a report of these
studies: NASA Project Mercury Working Paper No. 111, “Mercury-Redstone
Separation Distance ...”; NASA Project Mercury Working Paper No. 141,
“Dispersion Study of Separation Distance ...for Mercury-Redstone”; and
NASA Working Paper No. 152, “Determination of Mercury Escape Rocket
Thrust Eccentricity ...from Mercury-Atlas Booster.”
Letter, Space Task Group to Thiokol Chemical
Corporation (no subject), Feb 23, 1961, with inclosures.
February 24
Spacecraft No. 9 was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the Mercury-Atlas
5 (MA-5) orbital primate (Enos) mission.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
February 25
McDonnell conducted a successful drop test, using a boilerplate
spacecraft fitted with impact skirt, straps and cables, and a beryllium
heat shield. During the tests the stainless steel straps were
successfully stretched to design limits. (See fig. 46.)
Minutes, Group I Meeting 22, subject: Project Mercury
Coordination Meeting of February 27, 1961.
 |
Figure 46. Impact
attenuation. |
February (during the month)
The orbital psychomotor tester qualification tests began.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 10 for Period Ending April 30, 1961.
Instruction was provided to the astronauts to develop techniques and
procedures for using the personal parachute as an additional safety
feature in the Mercury program. This parachute was only used during the
Mercury-Redstone 3 (MR-3) mission manned by Alan Shepard.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 9 for Period Ending January 31, 1961.
March 2
Evaluation of the Mercury-Atlas 2 (MA-2) flight results disclosed that
the spacecraft afterbody temperatures were somewhat lower than had been
anticipated.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 10 for Period Ending April 30, 1961.
March 3
Factory roll-out inspection of Atlas launch vehicle No. 100-D was
conducted at Convair-Astronautics. This launch vehicle was allocated
for the Mercury-Atlas 3 (MA-3) mission.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 10 for Period Ending April 30, 1961.
March 6
“Detailed Test Objectives for NASA Mission MA-3” was published.
Report, Detailed Test Objectives for NASA Mission
MA-3, prepared by Mercury Space-Booster Program Office, The
Aerospace Corporation, March 6, 1961.
March 6-7
The third in the series of development engineering inspections on
Mercury spacecraft was held. At this time, spacecraft Nos. 12 and 15
were inspected, and some 50 requests for alterations were made.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 10 for Period Ending April 30, 1961.
March 7
Spacecraft No. 11 was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the
Mercury-Redstone 4 (MR-4) ballistic manned (Grissom) flight.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
Redstone launch vehicle No. 5 was delivered to Cape Canaveral for
the Mercury-Redstone, Booster Development flight (MR-BD).
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
March 8
Spacecraft No. 10 was accepted and delivered to the McDonnell altitude
test facility on March 31, 1961, for an orbital-flight environmental
test.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
March 14
Atlas launch vehicle 100-D was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the
Mercury-Atlas 3 (MA-3) mission. (See fig. 47.)
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
 |
Figure 47. Atlas launch
vehicle 100-D delivered to Cape Canaveral for Mercury-Atlas 3 flight.
|
March 16
The Space Task Group recommended that the Department of Defense give
consideration to assigning weather reconnaissance missions to the Air
Weather Service preceding Mercury orbital missions beginning with
Mercury-Atlas 4 (MA-4).
Letter, Walter C. Williams, Associate Director of
Project Mercury to Department of Defense Representative, Project
Mercury Support Operations, subject: Weather Reconnaissance Flights in
Support of Project Mercury, March 16, 1961.
Mercury spacecraft No. 10 was withdrawn from the flight program and
was allocated to a ground test simulating orbital flight environmental
conditions at the McDonnell plant site.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
The Space Task Group advised the Goddard Space Flight Center that
for all Mercury orbital missions, beginning with Mercury-Atlas 3
(MA-3), trajectory data would be required for postflight analysis.
Memo, Space Task Group to Goddard Space Flight
Center, subject: Requirements for Project Mercury Postflight Computing
at Goddard, Mar. 16, 1961.
Mission rules for Mercury-Atlas 3 (MA-3) were published. Revisions
were issued on April 4, and April 20, 1961.
Directive, subject: Mercury Control Center Countdown
Flight Control and Overall Operations, MA-3, Apr. 20, 1961.
March 18
Little Joe 5A (LJ-5A), the sixth in the series of Little Joe missions,
was launched from Wallops Island. This flight was intended to satisfy
test objectives, which were not met previously because of the failure
of the spacecraft to separate from the launch vehicle during the Little
Joe 5 (LJ-5) mission flown on November 8, 1960. For reference, the
purpose of this test was to demonstrate primarily the structural
integrity of the spacecraft and the escape system during an escape
maneuver initiated at the highest dynamic pressure anticipated during
an Atlas launch for orbital flight. Little Joe 5A (LJ-5A) lifted off
normally, but 19 seconds later the escape tower fired prematurely, a
situation closely resembling the November 1960 flight. The signal to
initiate the abort maneuver was given; and the launch vehicle-adapter
clamp ring was released as intended, but the spacecraft remained on the
launch vehicle since the escape motor was already expended. The
separation was effected by using the retrorockets, but this command was
transmitted before the flight had reached its apex, where separation
had been planned. Therfore, the separation was rather violent. The
parachutes did deploy at about 40,000 feet, and after recovery it was
found that the spacecraft had actually incurred only superficial
structural damage. In fact, this spacecraft was later used for the
subsequent Little Joe 5B (LJ-5B) flight test. Test objectives of the
Little Joe 5A (LJ-5A) were not met.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Preliminary Flight Results, Little Joe 5A, March 20, 1961; NASA Space
Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly] Status Report No. 10 for
Period Ending April 30, 1961.
March 20
Between this date and April 13, 1961, Phase III of the spacecraft
airdrop program was conducted. Primary objectives of the drops were to
study further the spacecraft suitability and flotation capability after
water impact. Six drops were made, but later (April 24-28, 1961) the
tests were extended for two additional drops to monitor hard-surface
landing effects. In the water phase of the program, spacecraft
components under particular scrutiny were the lower pressure bulkhead
and its capability to withstanding heat shield recontact without
impairing flotation capability. Helicopters were used to make the
drops.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 10 for Period Ending April 30, 1961.
Trajectory data for the Mercury-Redstone Booster-Development (MR-BD)
flight test were forwarded by Marshall Space Flight Center to the Space
Task Group and other interested organizations. The purpose of this
flight test was to provide a final check of the launch vehicle system
prior to the manned suborbital flights.
Letter, Marshall Space Flight Center to Space Task
Group, et al, subject: Project Mercury-Redstone: Trajectory Data
for MR-BD, March 20, 1961.
March 21
The Mercury-Atlas Missile Range Projects Office, headed by Elmer H.
Buller, was designated as a staff function of the Space Task Group
Director's office.
Memo, Robert R. Gilruth for Space Task Group Staff,
subject: Changes in Organization of the Space Task Group, March 21,
1961.
March 23
President John F. Kennedy advised Representative Overton Brooks (D-La.)
that he had no intention “to subordinate” the space activities of the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration to those of the military.
House of Representatives, Committee on Science and
Astronautics, Press Release, April 2, 1961, with inclosures.
March 24
After analyzing launch vehicle behavior in the Mercury-Redstone 1A
(MR-1A) and Mercury-Redstone 2 (MR-2), officials at the Marshall Space
Flight Center and the Space Task Group were of the opinion that there
were a number of problems that needed to be corrected prior to the
advent of manned flight. The problems to be resolved included jet-vane
vibration, instrumentation compartment vibration, failure of the
thrust-controller system, and several other areas that needed
attention. Many of these problems were studied by the personnel of
engineering activities and proposed solutions were formulated. It was
felt, however, that flight was necessary to verify the corrections and
the Mercury-Redstone Booster Development test was scheduled and flown.
All test objectives were met; as a result of this test, the launch
vehicle was man-rated for the planned suborbital flights.
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Mercury Redstone Booster Development Test, March 27, 1961; NASA Space
Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly] Status Report No. 10 for
Period Ending April 30, 1961.
March 27
In a NASA Headquarters' note to editors of magazines and newspapers, a
procedures and a deadline were established for submitting the
applications of accredited correspondents to cover the Mercury-Redstone
3 (MR-3) flight mission. As of April 24, 1961, the deadline date, 350
correspondents were accredited to cover the launch, the first manned
suborbital flight of Project Mercury.
NASA Note to Editors, Apr. 24, 1961.
March 30
Redstone launch vehicle No. 7 was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the
Mercury-Redstone 3 (MR-3) mission.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
March 31
As of this date, all stations of NASA's world-wide Mercury tracking
network were classed as being operational. An industrial team headed by
the Western Electric Company turned over the $60,000,000 global network
(figs. 48 and 49) to NASA in a formal ceremony later in the year.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 10 for Period Ending April 30, 1961; House
Committee Print, subject: Aeronautical and Astronautical Events of
1961, June 7, 1962.
Figure 48. MA-8 orbital track: Mercury Worldwide Tracking
Network. |
 |
Figure 49. Tracking
site at Kano, Nigeria, Africa. |
April 2
The first simulated orbital mission, with the spacecraft in the
altitude chamber, was conducted.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 10 for Period Ending April 30, 1961.
April 3
To satisfy the national interest in Project Mercury, Robert R. Gilruth
designated the Public Affairs Office as the point of contact for Space
Task Group activities to supply information, within the limits of
security, for news dissemination.
Memo, Robert R. Gilruth to Space Task Group, subject:
Public Affairs Activities, April 3, 1961.
April 4
John Glenn, Virgil Grissom, and Alan Shepard began a refresher course
on the Aviation Medical Acceleration Laboratory centrifuge in
preparation for the first manned Mercury-Redstone suborbital flight.
House Committee Print, subject: Aeronautical and
Astronautical Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
Mercury spacecraft No. 14A was delivered to Wallops Island for the
Little Joe 5B (LJ-5B) maximum dynamic-pressure abort mission. This
spacecraft was first used in the Little Joe 5A (LJ-5A) mission and was
then refitted for the LJ-5B flight.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
April 12
The Soviet Union announced that Major Yuri A. Gagarin had successfully
orbited the Earth in a 108 minute flight in a 5 ton Vostok (East), the
first man to make a successful orbital flight through space.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
April 18
The United States Weather Bureau stated that funds in the amount of
$200,000 would be required to support Project Mercury during the fiscal
year of 1962.
Letter, U.S. Department of Commerce, Weather Bureau,
to Robert R. Gilruth, Director of Project Mercury, no subject: April
18, 1961.
April 20
Spacecraft, mission, and launch vehicle flight safety were reviewed by
Space Task Group personnel in preparation for the Mercury-Redstone 3
(MR-3) mission.
Mercury Control Center Countdown Flight Control and
Overall Operations, MR-3, Apr. 20, 1961.
April 25
Mercury-Atlas 3 (MA-3) was launched from Cape Canaveral in an attempt
to orbit the spacecraft with a “mechanical astronaut” aboard. After
lift-off, the launch vehicle failed to roll to a 70 degree heading and
to pitch over into the proper trajectory. The abort-sensing system
activated the escape rockets prior to the launch vehicle's destruction
by the range safety officer after approximately 40 seconds of flight
that had attained an altitude of 16,400 feet. The spacecraft then
coasted up to 24,000 feet, deployed its parachutes, and landed in the
Atlantic Ocean 2,000 yards north of the launch pad. The spacecraft was
recovered and was found to have incurred only superficial damage; it
was then shipped to McDonnell for refitting.
Report, subject: Mercury-Atlas No. 3 (MA-3),
Memorandum Report for the Director, prepared by the Projects
Emgineering Branch, Space Task Group, April 28, 1961.
President Kennedy signed legislation making the Vice President of
the United States the presiding officer of the National Aeronautics and
Space Council.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
April 28
Little Joe 5B (LJ-5B) was launched from Wallops Island to test the
Mercury escape system under maximum dynamic pressure conditions. At the
time of lift-off, one of the launch vehicle rocket motors did not
ignite until after 4 seconds had elapsed. This delay caused the launch
vehicle to pitch into a lower trajectory than had been planned, with a
result that the abort maneuver experienced greater dynamic pressures
than had been specified in the flight test plan. Other than this, all
other sequential systems operated according to plan, and after landing,
a normal helicopter recovery was accomplished. Thus, all test
objectives were met and were actually exceeded because the spacecraft
withstood the higher dynamic pressures.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Administrator, subject:
Little Joe 5B Launch, Apr. 28, 1961.
A simulated countdown for the first Mercury-Redstone manned
suborbital flight (MR-3) was successfully completed.
House Committee Print, subject: Aeronautical and
Astronautical Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
May 5
A document was issued regarding use of a Scout test vehicle (fig. 50)
to evaluate the performance of the Mercury tracking and real-time
computing system. NASA Headquarters tentatively approved the plan on
May 24, 1961.
Memo, Abe Siverstein to NASA Associate Administrator,
subject: Use of Scout for Checkout of Mercury Network, May 24, 1961.
 |
Figure 50. Scout launch
vehicle proposed to test Mercury Worldwide Tracking Network. |
1961 (during the year)
Prior to entering the operational phase of Project Mercury, a decision
was made by Robert R. Gilruth and James E. Webb that the astronaut
selected for each flight would have the right to name his spacecraft,
which is in keeping with past traditions. Therfore, the astronaut
advised Robert R. Gilruth of the name of the spacecraft which he had
chosen (Freedom 7 in the case of the first flight) and Mr. Gilruth, in
turn, advised Mr. Webb of the name. The Federal Communications
Commission was also notified of the name since the spacecraft would be
using communications frequencies controlled by the Commission.
Information supplied by Lt. Col. John A. Power,
Public Affairs Office, MSC, Aug. 5, 1963.
May 5
Mercury-Redstone 3 (MR-3), designated the Freedom 7, the first Mercury
manned suborbital flight, was launched from Cape Canaveral, with
astronaut Alan Shepard as the pilot. (See fig. 51.) The Redstone
booster performed well during the boosted phase, although there were
some vibrations, and cutoff was well within specified limits. After
separation, Shepard exercised manual control of the spacecraft in the
fly-by-wire and manual proportional modes. The attitude control system
operated well, with few thruster fuel leaks. Reentry and landing were
accomplished without any difficulty. During the flight, the spacecraft
attained a maximum speed of 5,180 miles per hour, rose to an altitude
of 116.5 statute miles, and landed 302 statute miles downrange from
Cape Canaveral. (See fig. 52.) The pilot experienced a maximum of 6 g's
during the booster acceleration phase and slightly less than 12 g's
upon reentry. The duration of the flight was 15 minutes and 22 seconds,
with weightlessness existing for approximately 5 minutes. Recovery
operations were perfect, as helicopters were able visually to follow
the descent of the spacecraft. Contact was made with the pilot two
minutes after impact and recovery was initiated. (See fig. 53.) There
was no damage to the spacecraft, and Shepard was in excellent
condition. The first Mercury suborbital flight was a success.
NASA Report, Proceedings of a Conference on
Results of the First U.S. Manned Suborbital Space Flight, June 6,
1961.
 |
Figure 51.
Mercury-Redstone 3: First manned suborbital space flight. |
Figure 52. Mercury-Redstone 3 flight profile. |
 |
Figure 53. Freedom 7
returned by helicopter to USS Lake Champlain. |
May 8
Astronaut Alan Shepard, pilot of the Freedom 7 spacecraft (MR-3) was
awarded NASA's Distinguished Service Medal by President John F. Kennedy
in a ceremony at the White House.
NASA, The Space Flight of Astronaut Shepard and
the Freedom Seven.
May 11
Mercury spacecraft 8A was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the
Mercury-Atlas 4 (MA-4) orbital unmanned (mechanical astronaut) mission.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
May 13
NASA submitted its legislative program for the 87th Congress (S. 1857
and H.R. 7115), asking for authority to lease property, authority to
acquire patent releases, replacement of semiannual reports to Congress
with an annual one, and authority to indemnify contractors against
unusually hazardous risks.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
May 17
An Atlas investigation board was convened to study the cause of the
Mercury-Atlas 3 (MA-3) mission launch vehicle failure. Several possible
areas were considered, and three were isolated as probable causes based
on a review of test data.
Letter, B. A. Hohmann, Program Director, Mercury
Space-Booster, Aerospace Corporation, to NASA Hq., subject: Transmittal
of Mercury Atlas 100-D Investigation Board Status Report, June 14,
1961, with inclosures.
May 19
NASA Headquarters and the Space Task Group began a concerted effort in
reviewing Mercury progress to identify technical developments that were
potential inventions, discoveries, improvements, and innovations. This
action was in keeping with the policy and concept of providing
information on technical advances, within security limits and when
appropriate, to other agencies of the government and to American
industry.
Memo, Glenn F. Bailey, Contracting Officer, Space
Task Group, to J. M. Carson, Office of Patent Counsel, Langley,
subject: Contract NAS 5-59 Inventions, Sept. 8, 1961.
May 23-24
The fourth development engineering inspection on Mercury spacecraft was
held at McDonnell. Inspection activities were primarily centered on
spacecraft No. 18, and some 45 requests for alterations were initiated.
Memo, Richard B. Ferguson to Assistant Chief for
Mercury Support, Flight Systems Division, Space Task Group, subject:
Trip to McDonnell to Attend 4th DEI, June 2, 1961.
May 25
President Kennedy, in a major message to Congress, called for a vastly
accelerated space program based on a long-range national goal of
landing a man on the moon and bringing him safely back to Earth. For
this and associated projects in space technology, the President
requested additional appropriations totaling $611 million for NASA and
the Department of Defense.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
May 26-27
The first conference on the “Peaceful Uses of Space” was held at Tulsa,
Oklahoma. A second conference on this subject was held at Seattle,
Washington, on May 8-10, 1962. In both instances, Robert R. Gilruth
reported on the manned space flight aspect.
Proceedings of First National Conference on the
Peaceful Uses of Space, Tulsa, Oklahoma, May 26-27, 1961;
Proceedings of Second National Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Space, Seattle, Washington, May 8-10, 1962.
May 26
Between this date and June 4, 1961, the Mercury spacecraft Freedom 7
(MR-3) was displayed at the Paris International Air Show. Some 650,000
visitors received the details on the spacecraft and on Shepard's
suborbital flight.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
May 29
Between this date and June 30, 1959, a centrifuge training program was
conducted at the Aviation Medical Acceleration Laboratory directed
entirely toward training the astronauts for the Mercury-Atlas orbital
missions.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 11 for Period Ending July 31, 1961.
June 1
Prelaunch mission rules for Mercury-Atlas 4 (MA-4) were published.
Letter, Walter C. Williams, Associate Director, Space
Task Group, to Colonel Paul R. Wignall, Patrick AFB, Florida, subject:
Transmittal of Prelaunch Mission Rules for MA-4, June 1, 1961.
June 6
Biomedical results of the Mercury-Redstone 3 (MR-3), Shepard's
suborbital space flight, were reported in a Washington conference
jointly sponsored by NASA, National Institute of Health, and the
National Academy of Sciences.
Memo, George Low, NASA Hq., to William H. Allen,
subject: Conference on Medical Results of the First U.S. Manned
Suborbital Flight, June 16, 1961.
June 8
Mercury-Atlas 4 (MA-4) recovery requirements were published.
Letter, Walter C. Williams, Space Task Group, to
Commander, DESFLOTFOUR, no subject, June 8, 1961, with inclosures.
June 12
Redstone launch vehicle No. 8 was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the
Mercury-Redstone 4 (MR-4) suborbital flight mission.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
June 13
The Space Task Group forwarded to NASA Headquarters the details for the
Mercury-Scout instrumentation system. This mission was to check the
operational effectiveness of the Mercury global tracking network.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Deputy Director, Space
Flight Programs, subject: Mercury Status Items for Project Review
Meeting, June 27, 1961, June 22, 1961.
June 13-25
The Freedom 7 (MR-3) spacecraft was viewed by approximately 750,000
visitors at the Rassegna International Electronic and Nuclear Fair at
Rome, Italy.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
June 16
An Ad Hoc Task Group reported to NASA the results of its studies to
determine the main problems, the pacing items, and the major decisions
required to accomplish the manned lunar landing mission. The direct
ascent method was studied intensively with much less attention given to
the rendezvous method.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
June 21
Between the cited date and July 15, 1961, as a part of the
Mercury-Atlas animal program, chimpanzees received training in
acclimation to noise and vibration and to centrifuge runs at the
University of Southern California. Two of the animals flew parabolas in
a C-131 aircraft for weightlessness training. The animals were also
trained in advance psychomotor problems.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 11 for Period Ending July 31, 1961.
June 22
Mercury-Redstone 4 (MR-4) recovery requirements were forwarded by the
Space Task Group to the Navy.
Letter, Walter C. Williams, Space Task Group, to
Commander, DESFLOTFOUR, subject: Mercury-Redstone No. 4 Recovery
Requirements, June 22, 1961.
The Redstone booster for the Mercury-Redstone 4 (MR-4) manned
suborbital flight mission was erected on Pad 5, at Cape Canaveral.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
June 24
Modifications were made to the spacecraft designated for the second
manned suborbital Mercury flight. An observation window replaced two
view ports and an improved manual control system was installed.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
June 28
Using spacecraft No. 5, a spacecraft seaworthiness test was conducted
65 miles east of Wallops Island. Sea conditions varied with 2 to 4 foot
ground swells and wave heights of from 1 to 2 feet. Spacecraft
flotation characteristics were found to be quite satisfactory.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 11 for Period Ending July 31, 1961.
Tracking network requirements for the Mercury extended range or 1
day mission were discussed between Space Task Group and Goddard Space
Flight Center personnel.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 11 for Period Ending July 31, 1961.
June 29-30
Factory roll-out inspection of Atlas launch vehicle 88-D, designated
for the Mercury-Atlas 4 (MA-4) mission, was conducted at Convair.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 11 for Period Ending July 31, 1961.
Personnel strength of the Space Task Group was 794.
Statistics supplied by Kathryn Walker, Personnel
Division, MSC.
July 1
Responsibility for the operation of the Mercury global network was
assigned to the Goddard Space Flight Center. During active mission
periods, network control would revert to Space Task Group personnel.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 11 for Period Ending July 31, 1961.
July 11
Key personnel assignments were made by Walter C. Williams, Project
Mercury Operations Officer, for the Mercury-Redstone 4 (MR-4) manned
suborbital flight mission. These appointments included on-site liaison
and consultation, public affairs, photo couriers, and technical
observers. Stations covered were Mercury Control Center (fig. 54),
Atlantic Missile Range Central Control, landing area aircraft carrier,
supporting destroyers, support aircraft, and Base Operations at Patrick
Air Force Base.
Letter, Walter C. Williams to Department of Navy,
subject: MR-4 Recovery Requirements, July 11, 1961.
 |
Figure 54. Key
personnel in Mercury control center at Cape Canaveral: L to R, Walter
C. Williams, Flight Director; John A. (Shorty) Powers, Mission
Narrator; Christopher C. Kraft, Flight Director. |
July 13
Mercury-Redstone 4 (MR-4) manned suborbital flight mission rules were
published.
Memo, E. F. Kranz, Flight Control Branch, Space Task
Group, subject: MR-4 Mission Rules, July 13, 1961.
The Redstone launch vehicle designated for the Mercury-Redstone 6
(MR-6) mission was static tested at the Marshall Space Flight Center to
ensure satisfactory operation of the turbopump assembly.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
July 13-15
A spacecraft, launch vehicle, and mission flight safety review was held
in preparation for the Mercury-Redstone 4 (MR-4) manned suborbital
flight mission.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 11 for Period Ending July 31, 1961.
July 15
Atlas launch vehicle 88-D was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the
Mercury-Atlas 4 (MA-4) mission.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
July 18-19
Two attempts were made to launch Mercury-Redstone 4 (MR-4) with
astronaut Virgil Grissom aboard the spacecraft, but unfavorable weather
forced mission postponement.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
July 21
Mercury-Redstone 4 (MR-4), designated Liberty Bell 7, the second
Mercury manned suborbital flight, was launched from Cape Canaveral with
astronaut Virgil Grissom as the pilot. From lift-off to reentry,
operational sequences were similar to those of the first manned
suborbital flight. In the ballistic trajectory, the spacecraft reached
a peak altitude of 118 statute miles and landed 303 statute miles
downrange from Cape Canaveral. Grissom's flight experience was similar
to Shepard's in that there was a 5 minute period of weightlessness, and
neither reported any ill effects resulting from this condition. The
MR-4 pilot also found it easy to control his spacecraft attitude in the
manual mode of operation. The spacecraft was lost during the recovery
operations, when the explosive side egress hatch activated prematurely
while Grissom was awaiting helicopter pickup. The astronaut egressed
immediately and was retrieved after swimming in the water 3 or 4
minutes. With this second successful suborbital flight, the Space Task
Group felt there was nothing further to be gained from this phase of
Project Mercury, and the remaining Redstone launch vehicle flights were
canceled.
NASA Space Task Group Report, Results of the
Second U.S. Manned Suborbital Space Flight, July 21, 1961.
July 22
Astronaut Virgil Grissom, pilot of the MR-4 Liberty Bell 7, was awarded
the NASA Distinguished Service Medal by NASA Administrator James Webb
at the conclusion of the MR-4 press conference held at Cape Canaveral.
NASA, Liberty Bell 7, July 21, 1961.
July 27-28
After the 2-man space concept (later designated Project Gemini) was
introduced in May 1961, a briefing between McDonnell and NASA personnel
was held on the matter. As a result of this meeting, space flight
design effort was concentrated on the 18-orbit 1-man Mercury and on a
2-man spacecraft capable of advanced missions.
Notes on the early history of Project Gemini,
prepared by McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, undated.
July 31
Between the cited date and September 15, 1961, the astronaut centrifuge
training program at the Aviation Medical Acceleration Laboratory was
directed entirely toward the Mercury-Atlas orbital missions.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 11 for Period Ending July 31, 1961.
August 1-3
Seaworthiness characteristics of the operational Mercury spacecraft
were evaluated. Conditions during the test varied from ground swells of
5 to 15 feet, wave heights of 2 to 10 feet, and winds of 6 to 20 knots.
The test lasted for 33 hours and was quite successful.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 12 for Period Ending October 31, 1961.
August 6
U.S.S.R. launched Vostok II into orbit, carrying Major Gherman S.
Titov. The spacecraft weighed 13 pounds more than Vostok I (April 12),
and the progress of Cosmonaut Titov's flight was reported continuously
on Radio Moscow.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
August 9
Retrofire-from-orbit mission rules were published for the unmanned
Mercury-Atlas 4 (MA-4) orbital flight.
Memo, Flight Operations Division, Space Task Group,
to Associate Director, subject: Retrofire from Orbit Mission Rules for
MA-4, Aug. 9, 1961.
Key personnel operational assignments for the Mercury-Atlas 4 (MA-4)
unmanned orbital mission were made by the Space Task Group.
Letter, Walter C. Williams, Space Task Group, to
Commander, DESFLOTFOUR, subject: NASA Personnel Assignments for MA-4
Test, Aug. 9, 1961, with inclosures.
August 13
Spacecraft No. 15 was delivered to Cape Canaveral, but was returned to
McDonnell to be reconfigured to the orbital-manned 1-day mission and
tentatively assigned for Mercury-Atlas 10 (MA-10). Redesign was
completed, and the spacecraft, then designated number 15A (later
redesignated 15B), was delivered to Cape Canaveral on November 16,
1962.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
August 18
NASA Headquarters publicly announced that an analysis of Project
Mercury suborbital data indicated that all objectives of that phase of
the program had been achieved and no further Mercury-Redstone flights
were planned.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
August 22
Between the cited date and September 12, 1961, mission, spacecraft, and
launch vehicle flight safety reviews were held for the unmanned
Mercury-Atlas 4 (MA-4) orbital flight.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 12 for Period Ending October 31, 1961.
August 24
Mercury-Atlas 4 (MA-4) unmanned orbital flight was postponed.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
August 25
Explorer XIII, designed in part to measure the effects of
micrometeoroids on spaceflight, failed to meet expectations, thereby
necessitating further tests in this area.
Goddard Space Flight Center Chart, Satellites and
Space Probe Projects as of July, 1962.
August 27
Spacecraft No. 13 was shipped to Cape Canaveral. This particular
vehicle was designated for the first manned Mercury-Atlas orbital
flight (MA-6, Glenn). Test and checkout work on the spacecraft was
started immediately.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
August 30
An investigation was conducted as a result of the premature activation
of the Mercury-Redstone 4 (MR-4) explosive egress hatch. Tests were
initiated in an environment more severe than had been conducted in
prelaunch activities and tests, but no premature firings occurred. As a
backup, McDonnell was asked to design a mechanical-type hatch. The
model weighed some 60 pounds more than the explosive type, so other
methods had to be sought to prevent any recurrence of the incident. A
procedure was initiated which stipulated that the firing plunger safety
pin would be left in place until the helicopter hook was attached to
the spacecraft and tension was applied to the recovery cable.
Memo, Warren J. North to NASA Associate
Administrator, subject: Report of Investigations, Aug. 30, 1961.
August (during the month)
A NASA site selection team, headed by John F. Parsons, Associate
Director of the Ames Research Center, toured possible sites for the
permanent location of a manned spacecraft center. The team graded the
capabilities of these locations in meeting 10 specified requirements of
the new center. These were: (1) available facilities for advanced
scientific study; (2) power facilities and utilities; (3) water supply;
(4) temperature climate; (5) adequate housing for center personnel; (6)
at least 1,000 acres of land for the installation; (7) industrial
facilities available; (8) transportation facilities, including water
transportation for shipping cumbersome space vehicles by barge; (9) a
first-class, all-weather jet service airport; and (10) local cultural
and recreational assets. Sites considered were: Tampa, Florida;
Jacksonville, Florida; New Orleans, Louisiana; Baton Rouge, Louisiana;
Shreveport, Louisiana; Houston, Texas; Beaumont, Texas; Corpus Christi,
Texas; Victoria, Texas; St. Louis, Missouri; Los Angeles, California;
Berkeley, California; San Diego, California; Richmond, California;
Moffett Field, California; San Francisco, California; Bogalusa,
Louisiana; Liberty, Texas; Harlingen, Texas; and Boston, Massachusetts.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962; Newport News, Virginia, Daily
Press, Sept. 13, 1961; Information supplied by I. Edward Campagna,
Facilities Division, MSC, June 16, 1963.
August 5 to October 12
A series of environmental tests was conducted on the spacecraft
explosive egress hatch because of the difficulties experienced during
the Mercury-Redstone 4 (MR-4) mission.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 12 for Period Ending October 31, 1961.
September 5, 9 and 14
Three rocket sled tests were conducted at the Naval Ordnance Test
Station, China Lake, California, to study the detailed launch
vehicle-spacecraft, clamp-ring separation. From run to run, minor
modifications were made, and by the third run the separation action was
perfected.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 12 for Period Ending October 31, 1961.
September 8
A report was made on possible technical advances as a result of the
Mercury development program. A few of these are listed: (1) attenuation
of impact force from astronaut couch by using crushable honeycomb
structure; (2) interchangeable couch configuration for Mercury
spacecraft; (3) modified tower clamp ring to improve stability in abort
attitude; (4) hydrogen peroxide thrust chamber improvements; (5) oxygen
pressure transducer improvements; (6) de-stabilization flap to prevent
spacecraft wrong attitude reentry; (7) Mercury spacecraft landing bag
design; and (8) multi-nozzle rockets.
Memo, Glenn F. Bailey, Contracting Officer, Space
Task Group, to J. M. Carson, Office of Patent Counsel, Langley,
subject: Contract NAS 5-59 Inventions, Sept. 8, 1961.
September 13
Mercury-Atlas 4 (MA-4) was launched from Cape Canaveral with special
vibration and noise instrumentation and a mechanical crewman simulator
aboard in addition to the normal spacecraft equipment. This was the
first Mercury spacecraft to attain an earth orbit. The orbital apogee
was 123 nautical miles and the perigee was 86 nautical miles. After one
orbit, the spacecraft's orbital timing device triggered the retrograde
rockets, and the spacecraft splashed in the Atlantic Ocean 161 miles
east of Bermuda. Recovery was made by the USS Decatur. During the
flight, only three slight deviations were noted—a small leak in the
oxygen system; loss of voice contact over Australia; and the failure of
an inverter in the environmental control system. Overall, the flight
was highly successful: the Atlas booster performed well and
demonstrated that it was ready for the manned flight, the spacecraft
systems operated well, and the Mercury global tracking network and
telemetry operated in an excellent manner and was ready to support
manned orbital flight. (See fig. 55.)
Memo, George Low to NASA Administrator, subject:
Preliminary Results of MA-4 Flight, Sept. 15, 1961.
Figure 55. Normal Mercury-Atlas orbital mission sequence.
|
September 18
Mission rules for the Mercury-Atlas 5 (MA-5) orbital flight were
published. Revisions were issued on October 16 and 25, 1961, and
November 11, 1961.
Memo, Eugene F. Kranz, Flight Control Operations, to
J. A. Chamberlin, Space Task Group, subject: Mission Rules, MA-5/9,
Nov. 11, 1961.
September 19
James Webb, NASA Administrator, announced that the new NASA center for
manned space flight would be constructed upon a 1,000 acre site donated
by Rice University, southeast of Houston, in Harris County, Texas. The
Space Task Group would move from Langley Field to Houston, Texas.
Memo, Robert R. Gilruth to Space Task Group Staff,
subject: Location of New Site for Space Task Group, Sept. 19, 1961,
with inclosures.
September 20
Robert R. Gilruth and other officials of the Space Task Group surveyed
the Houston, Texas, area to seek temporary operational quarters while
the permanent installation was being constructed.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
September 21
D. Brainerd Holmes was appointed NASA's Director of Manned Space Flight
Programs. As general manager of Radio Corporation of America's Major
Defense Systems Division, Holmes had been project manager of the
Ballistic Missile Early Warning System. Congressman G. P. Miller
(D.-Calif.) succeeded the recently deceased Congressman Overton Brooks
of Louisiana as chairman of the House Committee on Science and
Astronautics.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
September 22
The Space Task Group announced that a 30-inch diameter balloon would be
installed in the Mercury spacecraft to allow for ship recovery should
the helicopter br forced to drop the spacecraft, as happened during the
Mercury-Redstone 4 (MR-4) recovery operations.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
September 24
NASA Administrator Webb announced major organizational changes and
top-level appointments to become effective November 1. The
reorganization should provide a clearer focus on major programs and
allow center directors to have a louder voice in policy making. The new
appointments included the following Directors of major program offices:
Ira H. Abbott, Office of Advanced Research and Technology; Homer E.
Newell, Office of Space Sciences; D. Brainerd Holmes, Office of Manned
Space Flight; and an as yet unnamed Director of Office of Applications
Programs. Also, Thomas F. Dixon was appointed Deputy Associate
Administrator; Abe Silverstein was named Director of the Lewis Research
Center, and Robert R. Gilruth was chosen Director of the Manned
Spacecraft Center.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
Evaluation of the inflatable flotation collar, attached by ground
personnel to sustain spacecraft buoyancy during recovery operations,
was completed. (See fig. 56.)
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 12 for Period Ending October 31, 1961.
 |
Figure 56. Auxiliary
flotation collar. |
October 1
Factory roll-out inspection of Atlas booster No. 93-D was conducted at
Convair. This booster was designated for the Mercury-Atlas 5 (MA-5)
mission.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 12 for Period Ending October 31, 1961.
October 9
Atlas booster No. 93-D was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the
Mercury-Atlas 5 (MA-5) orbital flight mission.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
October 13
NASA Headquarters approved construction projects for a permanent manned
spacecraft center installation at Clear Lake, southeast of Houston,
Texas. Buildings to be constructed included an auditorium, project
management, cafeteria, flight operations and life systems, life systems
laboratory, technical services, technical services shop, central data
processing, structures laboratory, research and development offices and
laboratory, equipment evaluation laboratory, support offices, support
warehouses and offices, and project test laboratory.
Information extracted from Monthly Progress Report,
Manned Spacecraft Center Facilities Division, August 1962; Notes,
subject: Manned Spacecraft Center Building Facility Requirements, Oct.
13, 1961.
October 20
The Mercury-Atlas 5 (MA-5) data aquisition plan was published by the
Mercury Data Coordination Office of the Space Task Group's Flight
Operations Division.
Plan, subject: MA-5 Data Acquisition Plan, prepared
by Mercury Data Coordination Office, Flight Operations Division, Space
Task Group, Oct. 20, 1961.
October 23
Freedom 7, the Mercury-Redstone 3 (MR-3) spacecraft, was presented by
NASA to the National Air Museum of the Smithsonian Institution.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
October 25
NASA Headquarters officially approved the Mercury extended range or
1-day mission program.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 13 for Period Ending January 31, 1962.
October 26-27
Ship retrieval tests were conducted to establish procedures for
recovery of a manned Mercury spacecraft. No difficulties were
encountered.
NASA Space Task Group, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 12 for Period Ending October 31, 1961.
October 29
An announcement was made that a Mercury-Scout launch would be made to
verify the readiness of the world-wide Mercury Tracking network to
handle further orbital flights.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
October (during the month)
Spacecraft 12 was delivered to Cape Canaveral as a backup for the MA-8
mission (six-orbit flight), but immediate consideration was given for
its modification to the Mercury extended range or 1-day mission. The
capsule was returned to McDonnell, reconfigured and stored.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
November 1
An attempt was made to launch Mercury-Scout 1 (MS-1) into orbit with a
communications package further to qualify the radar tracking of the
Mercury global network prior to manned orbital flight. Shortly after
lift-off, the launch vehicle developed erratic motions and attending
high aerodynamic loads, and was destroyed by the Range Safety Officer
after 43 seconds of flight. No further attempts were planned. The
Mercury-Atlas 4 (MA-4) mission and the successful Mercury-Atlas 5
(MA-5), flown on November 29, 1961, disclosed that the network met all
requirements.
Memo, George Low to NASA Director, Office of Manned
Space Flight, subject: Dynamic Checkout of the Mercury Ground Network
with Mercury-Scout, Nov. 8, 1961.
The Space Task Group, the organization charged with directing
Project Mercury and other manned spaceflight programs, was redesignated
the Manned Spacecraft Center, with Robert R. Gilruth as Director.
Memo, Paul E. Purser to MSC Employees, subject:
Designation of Space Task Group as “Manned Spacecraft Center,” Nov. 1,
1961.
November 15
Mercury spacecraft No. 18 was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the
second manned (Carpenter) orbital flight, Mercury-Atlas 7 (MA-7).
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
November 19
Factory roll-out inspection of Atlas launch vehicle 109-D was
conducted. (See fig. 57.) This booster was designated for the
Mercury-Atlas 6 (MA-6) mission, the first manned orbital space flight.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 13 for Period Ending January 31, 1962.
 |
Figure 57. Production
of Atlas launch vehicles at Convair Astronautics plant at Sorrento,
Calif. |
November 29
For the Mercury-Atlas 5 (MA-5) orbital mission, the Mercury astronauts
were assigned as spacecraft communicators at six of the Mercury global
network tracking stations.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 13 for Period Ending January 31, 1962.
Mercury-Atlas 5 (MA-5), the second and final orbital qualification
of the spacecraft prior to manned flight, was launched from Cape
Canaveral with Enos, a 37.5 pound chimpanzee, aboard. (See fig. 58.)
Scheduled for three orbits, the spacecraft was returned to earth after
two orbits due to the failure of a roll reaction jet and to the
overheating of an inverter in the electrical system. Both of these
difficulties could have been corrected had an astronaut been aboard.
The spacecraft was recovered 255 miles southeast of Bermuda by the
USS Stormes. During the flight, the chimpanzee performed
psychomotor duties and upon recovery was found to be in excellent
physical condition. The flight was termed highly successful and the
Mercury spacecraft well qualified to support manned orbital flight.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 13 for Period Ending January 31, 1962.
Astronaut John Glenn was selected as the pilot for the first manned
orbital flight, with Scott Carpenter as backup pilot. Immediately,
training was started to ready these two astronauts for the mission. The
five remaining astronauts concentrated their efforts on various
engineering and operational groups of the Manned Spacecraft Center in
preparation for the mission.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 13 for Period Ending January 31, 1962.
 |
Figure 58. Chimpanzee,
“Enos,” flown in Mercury-Atlas 5 two-orbit mission. |
November 30
Atlas launch vehicle 109-D was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the
Mercury-Atlas 6 (MA-6) first manned orbital mission.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
December 6
NASA Headquarters announced that the first Mercury manned orbital
flight was scheduled for early 1962. This decision was made when the
Mercury-Atlas 5 (MA-5) mission data indicated that the spacecraft
system, launch vehicle, and tracking network were ready.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
In a joint ceremony, astronauts Alan Shepard and Virgil Grissom were
awarded the first Astronaut Wings by their respective services.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
December 7
Plans for the development of a 2-man Mercury spacecraft were announced
by Robert R. Gilruth, Director of the Manned Spacecraft Center. On
January 3, 1962, this program was designated Project Gemini.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962; NASA Historical Office, Aerospace
Chronology, Jan. 1962.
December 11
A contract was awarded by the Army Corps of Engineers to a team headed
by Brown and Root, Incorporated, for design of a major portion of the
permanent facilities to be constructed for the Manned Spacecraft
Center.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
December 11-13
Spacecraft egress exercises were conducted for the astronauts in the
Back River near Langley Field. This training was especially conducted
for the pilots selected for the manned orbital mission and for
helicopter recovery teams. The astronauts made both top and side hatch
egresses from the spacecraft and no problems were encountered.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 13 for Period Ending January 31, 1962.
December 12
Spacecraft ultimate pressure tests to 20 pounds per square inch were
conducted, and subsequent inspection disclosed there was no structural
damage, deformation or failure.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 13 for Period Ending January 31, 1962.
December 14
Walter C. Williams told a University of Houston audience at Houston,
Texas, that the Mercury spacecraft had served and would continue to
serve as a test bed for developing orbital flight techniques and
hardware for more ambitious space programs.
Speech by Walter C. Williams, Deputy Director, MSC,
Dec. 14, 1961.
December 14-18
Two Mercury spacecraft solid bottom (no impact bag) water drop tests
were made. Subsequent inspections of the spacecaft structure and
ablation heat shield disclosed no structural damage.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 13 for Period Ending January 31, 1962.
December 18
Spacecraft external pressure tests were conducted at pressures up to 15
pounds per square inch. Bulkhead deflection was slight and well within
tolerable limits.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 13 for Period Ending January 31, 1962.
December 29
The appointments of Dr. Joseph F. Shea as Deputy Director for Systems
Engineering, Office of Manned Space Flight at NASA Headquarters, and
Dr. Arthur Rudolph as Assistant Director of Systems Engineering was
announced. Dr. Rudolph would serve as liaison between vehicle
development at Marshall Space Flight Center and the Manned Spacecraft
Center in Houston.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
December 31
Personnel strength of the Manned Spacecraft Center was 1,152.
Statistics supplied by Katheryn Walker, Personnel
Office, MSC.
Senior officials from NASA Headquarters, Marshall Space Flight
Center, and the Manned Spacecraft Center will sit on a Management
Council to insure the orderly and timely progress in the manned space
flight programs. The Council under the chairmanship of D. Brainerd
Holmes will meet at least once a month to identify and resolve problems
as early as possible and to coordinate interface problems between the
various Offices.
House Committee, Aeronautical and Astronautical
Events of 1961, June 7, 1962.
January 1
A survey was performed at the Manned Spacecraft Center to ascertain the
number of personnel who intended to move with the Center from Langley
Field to Houston, Texas. Only 84 personnel indicated they would not
make the move.
Memo, Director of Personnel, MSC, to Philip H.
Whitbeck, subject: Status Report for the Personnel Office, Jan. 26,
1962.
January 3
Exercises were held at the Lynnhaven Roads Anchorage near Norfolk,
Virginia, to determine the feasibility of using the auxiliary flotation
collar in recovery operations. The tests were successful and the collar
was adopted.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 13 for Period Ending January 31, 1962.
Flight controllers, excluding the medical monitors, were given a
final briefing prior to deployment to remote sites for the
Mercury-Atlas 6 (MA-6) mission.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 13 for Period Ending January 31, 1962.
January 15
Organization and staffing of the Manned Spacecraft Center's Mercury
Project Office was completed. Major organizational division of this
staff element included Office of Project Manager, Project Engineering
Office, Project Engineering Field Office (duty station at Cape
Canaveral), Engineering Operations Office, and Engineering Data and
Measurement Office. Kenneth Kleinknecht was appointed Manager of
Project Mercury.
MSC Announcement No. 92-2 by Robert R. Gilruth,
Director, subject: Establishment of Mercury Project Office, Jan. 15,
1962.
January 15-17
Recovery area swimmers were trained at the Pensacola Naval Air Station,
Florida, for use in the Mercury-Atlas 6 (MA-6) manned orbital mission.
(See fig. 59.) Instruction included films, briefings, auxiliary
flotation collar deployment, and jumps from a helicopter.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 13 for Period Ending January 31, 1962.
 |
Figure 59. Scuba divers
prepare for recovery of Mercury spacecraft. |
January 16
Spacecraft 16 was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the third manned
(Schirra) orbital flight, Mercury-Atlas 8 (MA-8).
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
January 23
Robert R. Gilruth, Director of the Manned Spacecraft Center, was
awarded the Louis W. Hill Space Transportation Award by the Institute
of Aerospace Sciences for his “outstanding leadership in technical
development of spacecraft for manned space flight.”
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Chronology,
Jan. 1962.
January 27
The Mercury-Atlas 6 (MA-6) manned orbital flight was postponed at
T-minus 29 minutes due to weather conditions.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Chronology,
Jan. 1962.
January 30
The Mercury-Atlas 6 (MA-6) mission was postponed because of technical
difficulties with the launch vehicle.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Chronology,
Jan. 1962.
January (during the month)
Three potential recovery areas were recommended for the Mercury
extended range or 1-day mission. These were: Grand Turk, Midway Island,
and the Japanese-Philippine Island area.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 13 for Period Ending January 31, 1962.
Modifications were started in order to use the New York-Bermuda
submarine cable for the transmission of high speed radar data from the
Bermuda network site to the Goddard Space Flight Center computers.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 13 for Period Ending January 31, 1962.
Twenty spacecraft aerial drop tests were planned for the Mercury
extended range or 1-day mission. One of the prime objectives was to
determine if the 63-foot ringsail main recovery parachute met all
Mercury mission weight requirements. Tests were scheduled to be
conducted at El Centro, California, and all tests would be land drops.
This test program was designated Project Reef.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 13 for Period Ending January 31, 1962.
February 1
NASA Headquarters announced that the Mercury-Atlas 6 (MA-6) manned
orbital mission would be scheduled no earlier than February 13, 1962,
and that repair of the Atlas launch vehicle fuel tank leak would be
completed well before that time.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Chronology,
Feb. 1962.
February 14
Unfavorable weather conditions caused the Mercury-Atlas 6 (MA-6) manned
orbital mission to be postponed.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Chronology,
Feb. 1962.
February 16
Walter C. Williams, Project Mercury Operations Director, announced that
because of weather conditions February 20, 1962, would be the earliest
date that the Mercury-Atlas 6 mission could be launched.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Chronology,
Feb. 1962.
February 20
Mercury-Atlas 6 (MA-6) was launched from Cape Canaveral with astronaut
John Glenn as pilot. (See fig. 60.) The Friendship 7 spacecraft covered
its three-orbit flight in 4 hours 55 minutes, and 23 seconds. Some 60
million persons viewed astronaut Glenn's launch on live television.
During the flight two major problems were encountered: (1) a yaw
attitude control jet apparently clogged, forcing the astronaut to
abandon the automatic control system for the manual-electrical
fly-by-wire system and the manual-mechanical system; and (2) a faulty
switch in the heat shield circuit indicated that the clamp holding the
shield had been prematurely released—a signal later found to be
false. During reentry, however, the retropack was not jettisoned but
retained as a safety measure to hold the heat shield in place in the
event it had loosened. The spacecraft landed in the Atlantic Ocean
about 800 miles southeast of Bermuda and was recovered by the USS
Noa after being in the water for 21 minutes. With the success of
Mercury-Atlas 6 (MA-6) the basic objectives of Project Mercury had been
reached—a man put into earth orbit, his reactions to space
environment observed, and his safe return to earth to a point where he
could be readily found. Prior to the flight, there was concern about
the psychological effects of prolonged weightlessness. To the contrary,
there were no debilitating or harmful effects, the astronaut found the
zero g conditions very handy in performing his tasks, and felt
exhilarated during his 4.5 hours of weightlessness. One of the
interesting sidelights of the Glenn flight was his report of “fire
flies” when he entered the sunrise portion of an orbit. For some time
this phenomenon remained a space mystery, until Scott Carpenter
accidently tapped the spacecraft wall with his hand, releasing many of
the so-called “fire flies.” The source was determined to be frost from
the reaction control jets.
MSC-NASA Report, Results of the First United
States Manned Orbital Flight, Feb. 20, 1962.
 |
Figure 60.
Mercury-Atlas 6: First manned (Glenn) orbital flight. |
February 21
A metal fragment, identified by numbers stamped on it as a part of the
Atlas that boosted Mercury-Atlas 6 (MA-6) into orbit, landed on a farm
in South Africa after about 8 hours in orbit.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, March 1962.
February 23
In a ceremony at Cape Canaveral, President John F. Kennedy awarded the
NASA Distinguished Service Medal to John Glenn and Robert R. Gilruth.
MSC Booklet, Astronaut John H. Glenn, Jr.,
Friendship 7, February 20, 1962.
February 25
Factory roll-out inspection of Atlas launch vehicle 107-D, designated
for the Mercury-Atlas 7 (MA-7) manned orbital mission, was conducted at
Convair.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 14 for Period Ending April 30, 1962.
February 26
John Glenn Day in Washington, D.C., featured the reception of the
astronaut at the White House, a parade, and his address to joint
session of Congress.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, Feb. 1962.
March 1
An estimated 4 million people lined the streets of New York City for
“John Glenn Day.” Mayor Robert Wagner presented Glenn and Robert R.
Gilruth the city's Medal of Honor.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, March 1962.
McDonnell submitted Mercury Report No. 8140, entitled “Contractor
Furnished Equipment Status Report,” showing the status of component
qualification tests.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 14 for Period Ending April 30, 1962.
March 2
The Mercury astronauts were guests of the United Nations, and John
Glenn acted as spokesman during an informal reception given by Acting
Secretary General U Thant.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, March 1962.
March 4-5
Scott Carpenter and Walter Schirra, designated (but not publicly) as
pilot and backup pilot, respectively, for the Mercury-Atlas 7 (MA-7)
manned orbital mission, underwent water-egress exercises. Several
side-hatch egresses were made in conjunction with helicopter pickups.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 14 for Period Ending April 30, 1962.
March 6
Atlas launch vehicle 107-D was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the
Mercury-Atlas 7 (MA-7) mission.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
March 7
The first Orbiting Solar Observatory (OSO) performed remarkably well in
conducting the thirteen different experiments for which it was
programmed. Especially relevant to manned space flight were its
measurements of solar radiation in high frequency ranges, of cosmic
dust effects, and of the thermal properties of spacecraft surface
materials.
Goddard Space Flight Center chart: Satellites and
Space Probe Projects as of July 1962.
March 9
John Glenn became the third man to be presented with Astronaut Wings in
a ceremony at the Pentagon.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, March 1962.
March 12
During the period of the move of the Manned Spacecraft Center from
Langley Field to Houston, Texas, primary Mercury operational activities
remained at Langley to prevent any disruptions in the Mercury
operational program.
Robert R. Gilruth, MSC No. 21 2-1, subject:
Relocation of Manned Spacecraft Center Headquarters, Feb. 26, 1962.
March 15
NASA Headquarters publicly announced that Scott Carpenter would pilot
the Mercury-Atlas 7 (MA-7) manned orbital mission replacing Donald
Slayton. The latter, formerly scheduled for the flight, was
disqualified because of a minor erratic heart rate.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, March 1962.
March 20
Spacecraft 19 was delivered to Cape Canaveral in the orbital-manned
configuration, but this mission was canceled after the successful
six-orbit flight of Schirra.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
March 22
Manned Spacecraft Center personnel briefed the Chief of Naval
Operations on the Mercury-Atlas 7 (MA-7) flight and ensuing Mercury
flights. This material was incorporated in a document entitled, “NASA
Project Mercury Advance Recovery Requirements.”
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 14 for Period Ending April 30, 1962.
March (during the month)
The PERT (Program Evaluation and Review Technique) reporting system
became operational on an experimental basis. The first PERT report on
the Mercury 1-day mission schedule and cost analysis was issued by the
Manned Spacecraft Center on April 26, 1962.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 15 for Period Ending July 31, 1962.
April 6
NASA sponsored a 1-day symposium in Washington on the results of the
Mercury-Atlas 6 (MA-6) three-orbit flight of John Glenn. One of the
items of particular interest was Glenn's “fire-flies,” or luminous
particles, and their possible origin.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, March 1962.
April 9
The National Geographic Society awarded the Hubbard Medal to John
Glenn. This award has been made only 20 times since its origination in
1906. Glenn joined such recipients as Admiral Robert A. Peary, Charles
A. Lindbergh, Roald Amundsen, and Admiral Richard E. Byrd.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, April 1962.
April 15
Scott Carpenter and Walter Schirra, designated as pilot and backup
pilot, respectively, for the Mercury-Atlas 7 (MA-7) manned orbital
mission, underwent a water exercise training program to review
procedures for boarding the life raft and the use of survival packs.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 14 for Period Ending April 30, 1962.
April 19
NASA announced that the spacecraft, Friendship 7, used in the
Mercury-Atlas 6 (MA-6) manned obital mission would be lent to the
United States Information Agency for a world tour, involving 20 stops
and touching all continents. This tour was known as the “fourth orbit
of Friendship 7.” William Bland of the Mercury Project Office served as
tour officer.
Letter, McDonnell Aircraft Corporation to Kenneth
Kleinknecht, no subject, Sept. 10, 1962, with inclosure, “A Detailed
Report on the Fourth Orbit of Frienship 7.”.
April 30
Some 27 items of bite-size food were sampled and tested for possible
inclusion in the Mercury space flights.
Activity Report, Life Systems Division, MSC, March
31, 1962 to April 30, 1962.
Swimmer training was started for the Mercury-Atlas 7 (MA-7) manned
orbital mission recovery area. Instruction consisted of films,
briefings, exercises in deploying the auxiliary flotation collar, and
jumps from a helicopter.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 14 for Period Ending April 30, 1962.
April (during the month)
Development of an advanced state-of-the-art pressure suit and helmet
was started. This action was taken in preparation for the Mercury
extended range or 1-day mission program. The objectives were aimed at
improvements in unpressurized suit comfort, suit ventilation, pressure
suit mobility, electrically heated helmet visor with additional light
attenuation features, and the fabrication of a mechanical visor seal
mechanism.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 14 for Period Ending April 30, 1962.
May 1
A gas analysis laboratory was installed in Hanger S at Cape Canaveral
to analyze gases used in the Mercury spacecraft.
Memo, G. Merritt Preston, Preflight Operations
Division, to Director, MSC, subject: Monthly Activities Report No. 6,
April 26, 1962.
May 4
A memorandum was issued on proposed experiments for inclusion in
Mercury manned orbital flights. This action was in keeping with a
statement made by Walter C. Williams before a University of Houston
audience that the spacecraft would be used as a test bed for more
ambitious space projects.
Weekly Activity Report to the Office of the Director
for Manned Space Flight, prepared by Management Analysis Office, MSC,
April 29-May 5, 1962.
Scott Carpenter, designated as the primary pilot for the
Mercury-Atlas 7 (MA-7) manned orbital flight completed a simulated MA-7
mission exercise.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, May 1962.
May 7
NASA announced that the Mercury-Atlas 7 (MA-7) manned orbital flight
would be delayed several days due to checkout problems with the Atlas
launch vehicle.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, May 1962.
May 15
Scott Carpenter, designated as the primary pilot of the Mercury-Atlas 7
(MA-7) manned orbital flight, flew a simulated mission with the
spacecraft mated to the Atlas launch vehicle.
Activity Report to the Office of the Director for
Manned Space Flight, prepared by Management Analysis Division, MSC, May
13-19, 1962.
May 17
The Mercury-Atlas 7 (MA-7) manned orbital mission was postponed a
second time because of necessary modifications to the altitude-sensing
instrumentation in the parachute-deployment system.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, May 1962.
May 19
A third postponement was made for the Mercury-Atlas 7 (MA-7) flight
mission due to irregularities detected in the temperature control
device on a heater in the Atlas flight control system.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, May 1962.
May 24
Mercury-Atlas 7 (MA-7) was launched into earth orbit with astronaut
Scott Carpenter as the pilot. The three-orbit flight of the spacecraft,
designated Aurora 7, achieved all objectives. Only one critical
component malfunction occurred during the mission—a random failure of
the circuitry associated with the pitch horizon scanner, which provides
a reference point to the attitude gyros. Also during the flight there
was concern over the excessive fuel usage, a condition which resulted
from extensive use of the high-thrust controls and the inadvertant use
of two control systems simultaneously. To compensate, the spacecraft
was allowed to drift for 77 minutes, in addition to the drifting
already a part of the flight plan. The flight lasted for 4 hours and 56
minutes, and the spacecraft landed in the Atlantic Ocean 125 miles
northeast of Puerto Rico, some 250 miles beyond the predicted impact
point. The overshoot was traced to a 25 degree yaw error at the time
the retrograde rockets were fired. Retrofire was about 3 seconds late,
which accounts for about 20 miles of the overshoot. Computers at the
Goddard Space Flight Center predicted the overshoot after the retrofire
action. Carpenter was recovered by a helicopter and taken to the USS
Intrepid after being in the water for 2 hours and 59 minutes. The
astronaut did not incur any detrimental physical or biomedical effects.
Two experiments were aboard the MA-7 spacecraft: one pertained to the
behavior of liquid in a weightless state, and the other was a deployed
balloon to measure drag and provide visibility data. The balloon failed
to inflate properly (fig. 61), but the liquid reacted as had been
anticipated (fig, 62). Carpenter also saw Glenn's “fire-flies.”
NASA, Results of the Second United States Manned
Orbital Space Flight, May 24, 1962, SP-6.
 |  |
Figure 61. Balloon experiment.
| Figure 62. Zero-gravity
experiment. |
May 27
Scott Carpenter and Walter C. Williams were awarded the NASA
Distinguished Service Medal by James Webb, NASA Administrator, in a
ceremony at Cape Canaveral.
MSC Booklet, Astronaut M. Scott Carpenter, Aurora
7, May 24, 1962.
May 28
Flight and ground tests disclosed that retrorocket heater blankets were
unnecessary to the spacecraft, and this item was removed.
MSC Highlights, prepared by Management Analysis
Office, May 28, 1962.
For possible application purposes, and upon request, the Manned
Spacecraft Center shipped Mercury-type survival kits to the Air Force
for its X-20 Dyna Soar development program and to the Navy.
MSC Highlights, prepared by Management Analysis
Office, May 28, 1962.
May 31
Technical Report No. 138, entitled “Results of Project Mercury
Ballistic and Orbital Chimpanzee Flights,” was completed.
May (during the month)
Decision was made between April 29 and May 5, 1962, that leg supports
would be removed from the Mercury couch. It had been determined that
the heel and toe supports could be used as the sole supports for the
lower leg. (See fig. 63.)
Weekly Activity Report to Office of Director for
Manned Space Flight, prepared by Management Analysis Division, April
29-May 5, 1962.
 |
Figure 63. Astronaut
couch modifications. |
June 13
The Manned Spacecraft Center proposed a recoverable meteoroid
experiment. According to the proposal, sheets of aluminium would be
extended from the Mercury spacecraft and exposed to a meteoroid
environment for a period of about 2 weeks. The sheets would then be
retracted into the spacecraft for protection during reentry and
recovery.
Memo, John R. Davidson to Langley Associate Director,
subject: Recoverable Meteoroid Penetration Experiment Using the Mercury
Capsule as a Container, June 19, 1962.
June 25
Scott Carpenter was the fourth individual of Project Mercury to be
presented Astronaut Wings by his respective service.
Information supplied by Edwin M. Logan, Astronaut
Activities Office, MSC.
June 26
Project Reef, an airdrop program to evaluate the Mercury 63-foot
ringsail main parachute's capability to support the higher spacecraft
weight for the extended range or 1-day mission was completed. Tests
indicated that the parachute qualified to support the mission.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 15 for Period Ending July 31, 1962; Monthly
Activities Report, Mercury Project Office, July, 1962.
June 27
D. Brainerd Holmes, NASA Director of Manned Space Flight, announced
that the Mercury-Atlas 8 (MA-8) manned orbital mission would be
programed for as many as six orbits. Walter Schirra was selected as the
prime pilot with Gordon Cooper serving as backup.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, June 1962.
NASA's Office of Advanced Research and Technology announced the
appointment of Dr. Eugene B. Konecci as Director of Biotechnology and
Human Research. Dr. Konecci will be responsible for directing research
and development of future life support systems, advanced systems to
protect man in the space environment, and research to assure man's
performance capability in space.
House Committee, Astronautical and Aeronautical
Events of 1962, June 12, 1963.
June 28
The Manned Spacecraft Center requested that the Langley Research Center
participate in acoustic tests of ablation materials on Mercury flight
tests. Langley was to prepare several material specimens which would be
tested for possible application in providing lightweight afterbody heat
protection for Apollo class vehicles. Langley reported the results of
its test preparation activities on September 21, 1962.
Memo, Langley to Manned Spacecraft Center, subject:
Transmittal of Data from Intense Noise Tests of Ablation Materials,
Sept. 21, 1962.
June 29
Engineering was completed for the spacecraft reaction control system
reserve fuel tank and related hardware in support of the Mercury
extended range or 1-day mission.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 15 for Period Ending July 31, 1962.
June 30
Personnel strength of the Manned Spacecraft Center was 1,802.
Statistics supplied by Katheryn Walker, Personnel
Division, MSC.
July 1
Relocation of the Manned Spacecraft Center from Langley Field to
Houston, Texas, was completed.
MSC Fact Sheet No. 59, subject: NASA Manned
Spacecraft Center Completes its Relocation to Temporary Houston
Facilities, July 1, 1962.
July 8
Controversial Operation Dominic succeeded, after two previous attempts
in June, in exploding a megaton-plus hydrogen device at more than
200-mile altitude over Johnston Island in the Pacific. Carried aloft by
a Thor rocket and synchronized with the approach of a TRAAC satellite,
this highest thermonuclear blast ever achieved was designed to test the
influence of such an explosion on the Van Allen radiation belts. The
sky above the Pacific Ocean from Wake Island to New Zealand was
illuminated by the blast. Later observations by probes and satellites
showed another artificial radiation belt to have been created by this
series of nuclear tests.
House Committee, Astronautical and Aeronautical
Events of 1962, June 12, 1963.
July 9
NASA scientists concluded that the layer of haze reported by astronauts
Glenn and Carpenter was a phenomenon called “airglow.” Using a
photometer, Carpenter was able to measure the layer as being 2 degrees
wide. Airglow accounts for much of the illumination in the night sky.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, July 1962.
July 11
NASA officials announced the basic decision for the manned lunar
exploration program that Project Apollo shall proceed using the lunar
orbit rendezvous as the prime mission mode. Based on more than a year
of intensive study, this decision for the lunar orbit rendezvous (LOR),
rather than for the alternative direct ascent or earth orbit rendezvous
modes, enables immediate planning, research and development,
procurement, and testing programs for the next phase of space
exploration to proceed on a firm basis. (See 16 June 1961.)
House Committee, Astronautical and Aeronautical
Events of 1962, June 12, 1963.
July 13
Tests were conducted with a subject wearing a Mercury pressure suit in
a modified Mercury spacecraft couch equipped with a B-70 (Valkyrie)
harness. When this harness appeared to offer advantages over the
existing Mercury harness, plans were made for further evaluation in
spacecraft tests.
MSC Life Systems Division, Weekly Activity Report,
July 9-13, 1962.
July 21
President John F. Kennedy announced that Robert R. Gilruth, Director of
Manned Spacecraft Center, would receive the President's Award for
Distinguished Federal Civilian Service. This award was made for his
successful accomplishment of “one of the most complex tasks ever
presented to man in this country. . . the achievement of manned flight
in orbit around the earth.”
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, July 1962.
July 27
Atlas launch vehicle No. 113-D was inspected at Convair and accepted
for the Mercury-Atlas 8 (MA-8) manned orbital mission.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 15 for Period Ending July 31, 1962.
August 6
The Friendship 7 spacecraft of the Mercury-Atlas 6 (MA-6) manned
orbital mission (Glenn flight) was placed on display at the Century 21
Exhibition in Seattle, Washington. After this exhibition, the
spacecraft was presented to the National Air Museum of the Smithsonian
Institution, at formal presentation exercises on February 20, 1963.
Information by Robert Gordon, Exhibits and Displays,
Public Affairs Office, MSC.
August 8
Spacecraft 9 (redesignated 9A) was phased into the Project Orbit
program in preparation for the Mercury extended range or 1-day mission.
Actual testing began in September 1962. NASA-MSC
Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly] Status Report No. 15 for Period
Ending July 31, 1962.
Atlas launch vehicle 113-D was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the
Mercury-Atlas 8 (MA-8) manned orbital mission.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
August 10
NASA announced the appointment of Dr. Robert L. Barre as Scientist for
Social, Economic, and Political Studies in the Office of Plans and
Program Evaluation. Dr. Barre will be responsible for developing NASA's
program of understanding, interpreting, and evaluating the social,
economic, and political implications of NASA's long-range plans and
accomplishments.
House Committee, Astronautical and Aeronautical
Events of 1962, June 12, 1963.
August 11
A spacecraft reaction control system test was completed. Data compiled
from this test was used to evaluate the thermal and thruster
configuration of the Mercury extended range or 1-day mission
spacecraft.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 16 for Period Ending October 31, 1962.
August 11-12
U.S.S.R. launched VOSTOK III into orbit, piloted by Major Andrian G.
Nikolayev. The next day, August 12, VOSTOK IV was launched into orbit
piloted by Lt. Colonel Pavel R. Popovich, and near-rendezvous was
achieved.
House Committee, Astronautical and Aeronautical
Events of 1962, June 12, 1963.
August 15/
Navy swimmers, designated for the Mercury-Atlas 8 (MA-8) manned orbital
mission recovery area, started refresher training at Pensacola,
Florida. Instruction included installing the auxiliary flotation collar
on a boilerplate spacecraft and briefings on assisting astronaut egress
from the spacecraft.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 15 for Period Ending July 31, 1962.
August 21
A conference was held at the Rice Hotel, Houston, Texas, on the
technical aspects of the Mercury-Atlas 7 (MA-7) manned orbital mission
(Carpenter flight).
Conference attended by author.
August (during the month)
The first edition of the map for the Mercury 1-day mission was
published.
USAF Aeronautical Chart and Information Center, 1st
ed., Aug. 1962.
August-September
Negotiations were completed with McDonnell for spacecraft configuration
changes to support the Mercury 1-day manned orbital mission. The design
engineering inspection, when the necessary modifications were listed,
was held on June 7, 1962.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 15 for Period Ending July 31, 1962.
September 7
The results of a joint study by the Atomic Energy Commission, the
Department of Defense, and NASA concerning the possible harmful effects
of the artificial radiation belt created by Operation Dominic on
Project Mercury's flight MA-8 were announced. The study predicted that
radiation on outside of capsule during astronaut Walter M. Schirra's
six-orbit flight would be about 500 roentgens but that shielding,
vehicle structures, and flight suit would reduce this dosage down to
about 8 roentgens on the astronaut's skin. This exposure, well below
the tolerance limits previously established, would not necessitate any
change of plans for the MA-8 flight.
House Committee, Astronautical and Aeronautical
Events of 1962, June 12, 1963.
September 8
Atlas launch vehicle 113-D for the Mercury-Atlas 8 (MA-8) manned
orbital mission was static-fired at Cape Canaveral. This test was
conducted to check modifications that had been made to the booster for
the purpose of smoother engine combustion.
Mercury Project Office, Monthly Activity Report,
Sept. 1962.
September 10
The Mercury-Atlas 8 (MA-8) manned orbital mission was postponed and
rescheduled for September 28, 1962, to allow additional time for flight
preparation.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, Sept. 1962.
September 12
President John F. Kennedy visited the Manned Spacecraft Center and was
shown exhibits including Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo spacecraft
hardware.
MSC Weekly Activity Report for the Office of the
Director of Manned Space Flight, Sept. 2-8, 1962.
NASA announced it would launch a special satellite before the end of
the year “to obtain information on possible effects of radiation on
future satellites and to give the world's scientific community
additional data on the artificial environment created by the radiation
belt.” The 100-pound satellite would be launched from Cape Canaveral
into an elliptical orbit ranging from about 170-mile perigee to
10,350-mile apogee.
First “mystery” satellite in history of space exploration was
launched, according to British magazine Flight International.
The magazine said the satellite orbited at a height of 113 miles and
reentered the earth's atmosphere 12 days later. The satellite was
listed as belonging to the U.S. Air Force, but spokesman said this was
a “scientific guess based on our assessment of previous satellite
launchings.” Launching was not confirmed, and no official U.S. listing
included such a satellite.
House Committee, Astronautical and Aeronautical
Events of 1962, June 12, 1963.
September 17
Studies completed by the Navy Biophysics Branch of the Navy School of
Aviation Medicine, Pensacola, Florida, disclosed that astronaut Glenn
had received less than one-half the cosmic radiation dosage expected
during his orbital flight. The Mercury-Atlas 6 (MA-6) spacecraft walls
had served as excellent protection.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, Sept. 1962.
September 18
Donald Slayton, one of the seven chosen for the astronaut training
program, was designated Coordinator of Astronaut Activities at the
Manned Spacecraft Center.
Robert R. Gilruth, MSC Announcement No. 87 2-2,
subject: Coordinator of Astronaut Activities, Sept. 18, 1962.
The NASA spacecraft test conductor and the Convair test conductor
notified the interface committee chairman of the readiness-for-mate of
the adapter-interface area of the Mercury-Atlas 8 (MA-8).
Memo, O. L. Duggan to Associate Director, MSC,
subject: MA-8 (Spacecraft 16) Interface Inspection, Sept. 18, 1962.
September 22
As an experiment, Walter Schirra planned to carry a special 2.5-pound
hand camera aboard the Mercury-Atlas 8 (MA-8) spacecraft. (See fig.
64.) During the flight, the astronaut would attempt to arrive at
techniques that could be applied to an advanced Nimbus weather
satellite.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 16 for Period Ending October 31, 1962.
 |
Figure 64. MA-8 ditty
bag contents: 1. Camera (see text), 2. Photometer, 3. Color film
magazine, 4. Film magazine, 5. Food containers, 6. Dosimeter, 7. Motion
sickness container, 8. Exposure meter, 9. Camera shoulder strap.
|
September 28
Walter Schirra made a 6.5 hour simulated flight in the Mercury-Atlas 8
(MA-8) spacecraft. The worldwide tracking network of 21 ground stations
and ships also participated in the exercise.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 16 for Period Ending October 31, 1962.
October 1
Tropical storm “Daisy” was studied by Mercury operations activities for
its possible effects on the Mercury-Atlas 8 (MA-8) mission, but flight
preparations continued.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, Oct. 1962.
October 3
Mercury-Atlas 8 (MA-8), designated Sigma 7, was launched from Cape
Canaveral with astronaut Walter Schirra as the pilot for a scheduled
six-orbit flight. (See fig. 65.) Two major modifications had been made
to the spacecraft to eliminate difficulties that had occurred during
the Glenn and Carpenter flights. The reaction control system was
modified to disarm the high-thrust jets and allow the use of low-thrust
jets only in the manual operational mode to conserve fuel. A second
modification involved the addition of two high frequency antennas
mounted onto the retro package to assist and maintain spacecraft and
ground communication throughout this flight. Schirra termed his
six-orbit mission a “textbook flight.” About the only difficulty
experienced was attaining the correct pressure suit temperature
adjustment. The astronaut became quite warm during the early orbits,
but at a subsequent press conference he reported there had been many
days at Cape Canaveral when he had been much hotter sitting under a
tent on the beach. To study fuel conservation methods, a considerable
amount of drifting was programed during the MA-8 mission. This included
118 minutes during the fourth and fifth orbits and 18 minutes during
the third orbit. Since drift error was slight, attitude fuel
consumption was no problem. At the start of the reentry operation there
was a 78 percent supply in both the automatic and manual tanks,
enabling Schirra to use the automatic mode during reentry. After a 9
hour and 13 minute orbital flight, the MA-8 landed 275 miles northeast
of Midway Island, 9,000 yards from the prime recovery ship, the USS
Kearsarge. Schirra stated that he and the spacecraft could have
continued for much longer. The flight was the most successful to that
time. Besides the camera experiment (September 22, 1962, entry), nine
ablative material samples were laminated onto the cylindrical neck of
the spacecraft, and radiation-sensitive emulsion packs were placed on
each side of the astronaut's couch. As a note of unusual interest, the
MA-8 launch was relayed via the Telstar satellite to television
audiences in Western Europe.
NASA, Results of the Third United States Manned
Orbital Space Flight, October 3, 1962, SP-12.
 |
Figure 65. Astronaut
departs transfer van for Mercury-Atlas gantry. |
October 5
Spacecraft 16, Sigma 7, was returned to Hanger S at Cape Canaveral for
postflight work and inspection. It was planned to retain the Sigma 7 at
Cape Canaveral for permanent display.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury [Quarterly]
Status Report No. 16 for Period Ending October 31, 1962; Data
supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office, MSC; Message MSC-74
NASA-MSC-AMR Operations to Robert R. Gilruth, MSC, Oct. 29, 1962.
Dr. Charles A. Berry, Chief of Aerospace Medical Operations, Manned
Spacecraft Center, reported that preliminary dosimeter readings
indicated that astronaut Schirra had received a much smaller radiation
dosage than expected.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, Oct. 1962.
A U.S. Air Force spokesman, Lt. Colonel Albert C. Trakowski,
announced that special instruments on unidentified military test
satellites had confirmed the danger that astronaut Walter M. Schirra,
Jr., could have been killed if his MA-8 space flight had taken him
above a 400-mile altitude. The artificial radiation belt, created by
the U.S. high altitude nuclear test in July, sharply increases in
density above 400-miles altitude at the geomagnetic equator and reaches
peak intensities of 100 to 1,000 times normal levels at altitudes above
1,000 miles.
House Committee, Astronautical and Aeronautical
Events of 1962, June 12, 1963.
October 7
The Mercury-Atlas 8 (MA-8) press conference was held at the Rice
University, Houston, Texas. Astronaut Schirra expressed his belief that
the spacecraft was ready for the 1-day mission, that he experienced
absolutely no difficulties with his better than 9 hours of
weightlessness, and that the flight was of the “textbook” variety.
Transcript of Press Conference (MA-8) held at Rice
University, Oct. 8, 1962.
October 9
Spacecraft 20 was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the Mercury-Atlas 9
(MA-9) 1-day mission flight.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC.
October 15
A high frequency direction finding system study was initiated. This
study, covering a 12-month period, involved the development of
high-frequency direction finding techniques to be applied in a network
for locating spacecraft. The program was divided into a 5-month study
and feasibility phase, followed by a 7-month program to provide
operational tests of the procedures during actual Mercury flights or
follow-on operations.
Letter, Kellogg Space Communications Laboratory to
MSC, subject: Contract No. NAS 9-804, Oct. 22, 1962.
Walter Schirra was awarded the NASA Distinguished Service Medal by
James Webb, NASA Administrator, for his six-orbit Mercury-Atlas 8
(MA-8) flight in a ceremony at his hometown, Oradell, New Jersey.
Information supplied by Ivan Ertel, Publi Affairs
Office, MSC.
October 16
Walter Schirra became the fifth member of the Project Mercury team to
receive Astronaut Wings.
Information supplied by Ivan Ertel, Publi Affairs
Office, MSC.
October 19
McDonnell reported that all spacecraft system tests had been completed
for spaceraft 20, which was allocated for the Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9)
1-day orbital mission.
McDonnell Report, subject: Model 133L- Project
Mercury Spacecraft No. 20 Capsule Systems Tests, Oct. 19, 1962.
October 23
Major General Leighton Davis, Department of Defense representative for
Project Mercury Support Operations, reported that support operation
planning was underway for the Mercury 1-day mission.
Letter, Air Force Missile Test Center to Robert S.
McNamara, Secretary of Defense, subject: Department of Defense Support
of Mercury-Atlas (MA-8), Oct. 23, 1962, with inclosures.
The Air Force Missile Test Center, Cape Canaveral, Florida,
submitted a report to the Secretary of Defense summarizing Department
of Defense support during the Mercury-Atlas 8 (MA-8) six-orbit flight
mission.
Letter, Air Force Missile Test Center to Robert S.
McNamara, Secretary of Defense, subject: Department of Defense Support
of Mercury-Atlas (MA-8), Oct. 23, 1962, with inclosures.
October 25
NASA Associate Administrator Robert C. Seamans, Jr., presented
Outstanding Leadership Awards to Maxime A. Faget, Assistant Director
for Engineering and Development, Manned Spacecraft Center, and George
B. Graves, Jr., Assistant Director for Information and Control Systems.
Also, at the NASA annual awards ceremony the Administrator, James E.
Webb, presented Group Achievement Awards to four Manned Spacecraft
Center activities: Assistant Directorate for Engineering and
Development, Preflight Operations Division, Mercury Project Office, and
Flight Operations Division.
NASA Historical Office, Aerospace Science and
Technology: A Chronology for 1962, Oct. 1962.
October 30
NASA announced realignment of functions within the office of Associate
Administrator Robert C. Seamans, Jr. D. Brainerd Holmes assumed new
duties as a Deputy Associate Administrator of Manned Space Flight. NASA
field installations engaged primarily in manned space flight (Marshall
Space Flight Center, MSC, and Launch Operations Center) would report to
Holmes; installations engaged principally in other projects (Ames,
Lewis Research Center, Langley Research Center, Goddard Space Flight
Center, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and Wallops Island) would report to
Thomas F. Dixon, Deputy Associate Administrator for the past year.
Previously, most field center directors had reported directly to Dr.
Seamans on institutional matters beyond program and contractural
administration.
House Committee, Astronautical and Aeronautical
Events of 1962, June 12, 1963.
November 1
Mercury Procedures Trainer No. 1, redesignated Mercury Simulator, was
moved from Langley Field on July 23, 1962, and installed and readied
for operations in a Manned Spacecraft Center building at Ellington Air
Force Base, Houston, Texas.
Activity Report, Flight Crew Operations Division,
MSC, Aug. 20-28, 1962.
November 4
Enos, the 6-year-old chimpanzee who made a two-orbit flight around the
earth aboard the Mercury-Atlas 5 (MA-5) spacecraft (November 29, 1961,
entry) died at Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico. The chimpanzee had
been under night and day observation and treatment for 2 months before
his death. He was afflicted with shigella dysentary, a type resistant
to antibiotics, and this caused his death. Officials at the Air Medical
Research Laboratory stated that his illness and death were in no way
related to his orbital flight the year before.
Information supplied by Aeromedical Research Center,
Albuquerque, New Mexico, Nov. 6, 1962.
November 13
Gordon Cooper was named as the pilot for Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9) 1-day
orbital mission slated for April 1963. Alan Shepard, pilot of
Mercury-Redstone 3 (MR-3) was designated as backup pilot.
NASA Hq. Release No. 52-245, subject: Cooper Named
Pilot for MA-9 Flight, Nov. 14, 1962.
The B. F. Goodrich Company reported that it had successfully
designed, fabricated, and tested a pivoted light attenuation tinted
visor to be mounted on a government-issued Mercury helmet.
Technical Report No. 62E-006, subject: Pivoted Light
Attenuation Tinted Visor Helmet, submitted by B. F. Goodrich, Aerospace
and Defense Products to MSC, Nov. 13, 1962.
November 16
The Manned Spacecraft Center presented the Department of Defense with
recovery and network support requirements for Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9)
1-day manned orbital mission.
Letter, MSC to Air Force Missile Test Center,
subject: Project Mercury Preliminary Recovery and Network Requirements
for MA-9, Nov. 16, 1962.
Mercury spacecraft 15A was delivered to Cape Canaveral for the
Mercury-Atlas 10 (MA-10) orbital manned 1-day mission.
Data supplied by Ken Vogel, Mercury Project Office,
MSC (See also August 13, 1961, entry).
November 28
Mercury Simulator 2 was modified to the 1-day Mercury orbital
configuration in preparation for the Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9) flight.
Memo, Riley D. McCafferty to Mercury Project Office,
subject: Mercury Flight Simulator Status Report, Nov. 28, 1962.
On this date, the McDonnell Aircraft Corporation reported that as of
October 31, 1962, it had expended 4,231,021 man-hours in engineering;
478,926 man-hours in tooling; and 2,509,830 man-hours in production in
support of Project Mercury.
Letter, McDonnell to MSC, subject: Contract NAS 5-59,
Mercury, Monthly Financial Report, Nov. 28, 1962.
Retrofire was reported to have initiated 2 seconds late during the
Mercury-Atlas 8 (MA-8) mission. Because of this, the mechanics and
tolerances of the Mercury orbital timing device were reviewed for the
benefit of operational personnel, and the procedural sequence for
Mercury retrofire initiation was outlined.
Memo, J. D. Collier to John Hodge, Flight Operations
Division, subject: Mercury Retrofire Initiation by the Spacecraft
Satellite Clock, Nov. 28, 1962.
December 3-4
A pre-operational conference for the Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9) 1-day
mission was held at Patrick Air Force Base, Florida, to review plans
and the readiness status of the Department of Defense to support the
flight. Operational experiences during the six-orbit Mercury-Atlas 8
(MA-8) mission were used as a planning guideline.
Letter, Air Force Missile Test Center to MSC, et
al., subject: Minutes of Pre-Operational Conference for Project
Mercury One-Day Mission (MA-9), Dec. 18, 1962.
December 4
Information was received from the NASA Inventions and Contributions
activity that seven individuals, a majority of whom were still
associated with the Manned Spacecraft Center, would receive monetary
awards for inventions that were important in the development of Project
Mercury. These were: Andre Meyer ($1,000) for the vehicle parachute and
equipment jettison equipment; Maxime Faget and Andre Meyer (divided
$1,500) for the emergency ejection device; Maxime Faget, William Bland,
and Jack Heberlig (divided $2,000) for the survival couch; and Maxime
Faget, Andre Meyer, Robert Chilton, Williard Blanchard, Alan Kehlet,
Jerome Hammack, and Caldwell Johnson (divided $4,200) for the
spacecraft design. Formal presentation of these awards was made on
December 10, 1962.
Letter, James A. Hootman, NASA Hq. to Dr. Robert R.
Gilruth, MSC, subject: Monetary Awards for Project Mercury Inventors,
Dec. 4, 1962.
December 7
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Instrumentation Laboratory,
charged with the development of the Apollo guidance and navigation
system, was in the process of studying the earth's sunset limb to
determine if it could be used as a reference for making observations
during the mid-course phase of the mission. To obtain data for this
study, the laboratory requested that photographic observations be made
during the Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9) 1-day orbital mission. Photographic
material from the Mercury-Atlas 7 (MA-7—Carpenter flight) had been
used in this study.
Letter, Massachusetts Institute of Technology to MSC,
Dec. 7, 1962.
December 14
Notice was received by the Manned Spacecraft Center from the NASA
Office of International Programs that diplomatic clearance had been
obtained for a survey trip to be conducted at the Changi Air Field,
Singapore, in conjunction with Project Mercury contingency recovery
operations. Also, the United Kingdom indicated informally that its
protectorate, Aden, could be used for contingency recovery aircraft for
the Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9) 1-day mission.
Memo, Carl N. Jones, NASA Hq. to Christopher C.
Kraft, MSC, subject: Use of Aden and Singapore for Contingency Recovery
Purposes, Dec. 14, 1962.
December 15
Facilities at Woomera, Australia, a segment of the Mercury global
network for telemetry reception and air-to-ground voice communications,
was declared no longer required for Mercury flights.
Memo, George M. Low to NASA Director of Network
Operations and Facilities, subject: Fixture Requirements for Woomera
Telemetry and Air-to-Ground Facilities, Dec. 15, 1962.
December 31
After reviewing Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9) recovery and network support
requirements, the document covering the Department of Defense support
of Project Mercury was forwarded to appropriate Department of Defense
operational units for indication of their capability to fulfill
requirements.
Letter, Air Force Missile Test Center Hq. to
COMDESFLOTFOUR, et al., subject: Department of Defense Support
of Project Mercury Operations (MA-9), Dec. 31, 1962.
As of this date, the cumulative cost of the Mercury spacecraft
design and development program with the McDonnell Aircraft Corporation,
Contract NAS 5-59, had reached $135,764,042. During the tenure of this
contract, thusfar, there had been 56 amendments and approximately 379
contract change proposals (CCP). At the end of the year, McDonnell had
about 325 personnel in direct labor support of Project Mercury. Between
March and May of 1960, the personnel complement had been slightly
better than 1,600, representing a considerable rise from the 50 people
McDonnell had assigned in January 1959 when study and contract
negotiations were in progress. Peak assignments by month and by
activity were as follows: Tooling—February 1960; Engineering—April
1960; and Production—June 1960.
Letter, McDonnell to MSC, subject: Contract NAS 5-59,
Mercury, Monthly Financial Report, Jan. 25, 1962, with inclosures.
December (during the month)
Three categories of experiments were proposed for the Mercury-Atlas 9
(MA-9) manned orbital mission: (1) space flight engineering and
operations, (2) biomedical experiments, and (3) space science. The
trailing balloon, similar to the MA-7 (Carpenter flight), was to be
included. This balloon would be ejected, inflated, trailed, and
jettisoned while in orbit. Another experiment was the installation of a
self-contained flashing beacon installed on the retropackage, which
would be initiated and ejected from the retropackage during orbital
flight. And a geiger counter experiment was planned to determine
radiation levels at varying orbital altitudes.
Memo, Eugene M. Shoemaker, Chairman, Manned Space
Science Planning Group to Director, Office of Manned Space Flight, Dec.
1962.
January 3
Tentative plans were made by NASA to extend the Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9)
flight from 18 to 22 orbits.
NASA Historical Office, Astronautics and
Aeronautics Chronology of Science and Technology in the Exploration of
Space, January 1963.
January 7
Final acceptance tests were conducted on the Mercury space flight
simulator at Ellington Field, Texas. This equipment, formerly known as
the procedures trainer, was originally installed at Langley Field and
was moved from that area to Houston. Personnel of the Manned Spacecraft
Center and the Farrand Optical Company conducted the acceptance tests.
Letter, Farrand Optical Company, Inc., to NASA MSC,
subject: Progress Report, Space Flight Simulator for Mercury Capsule,
Jan. 22, 1963, with inclosures.
January 10-16
During this period, Mercury spacecraft No. 9A was cycled through
Project Orbit Mission Runs 108, 108A, and 108B in the test facilities
of the McDonnell Aircraft Corporation. These runs were scheduled for
full-scale missions and proposed to demonstrate a 1-day mission
capability. In otherwords, plans called for the operation of spacecraft
systems according to the MA-9 flight plan, including the use of onboard
supplies of electrical power, oxygen, coolant water, and hydrogen
peroxide. Hardlines were used to simulate the astronaut control
functions. Runs 108A and 108B were necessitated by an attempt to
achieve the prescribed mission as cabin pressure difficulties forced a
halt to the reaction control system thrust chamber operations portion
of Run 108, although the other systems began to operate as programed.
Later in 108 difficulties developed in the liquid nitrogen flow and
leaks were suspected. Because of these thermal simulation problems, the
test was stopped after 1 hour. Little improvement was recorded in Run
108A as leaks developed in the oxygen servicing line. In addition,
cabin pressures were reduced to one psia, and attempts to repressurize
were unsuccessful. The run was terminated. Despite the fact that Run
108B met with numerous problems—cabin pressure and suit temperature—
a 40-hour and 30-minute test was completed.
Letter, McDonnell Aircraft Corporation to NASA MSC,
subject: Project Mercury, Model 133L, Project Orbit Spacecraft No. 9A
T+ 3 Day Test Report, Category IV-I, Runs 108, 108A, 108B, Transmittal
of, Jan. 25, 1963.
January 11
The Project Engineering Field Office (located at Cape Canaveral) of the
Mercury Project Office reported on the number of changes made to
spacecraft 20 (MA-9) as of that date after its receipt at Cape
Canaveral from McDonnell in St. Louis. There were 17 specific changes,
which follow: one to the reaction control system, one to the
environmental control system, seven to the electrical and sequential
systems, and eight to the console panels.
Report, subject: Differences between Spacecraft 16
(MA-8) and Spacecraft 20 (MA-9) as of January 11, 1963, with Chart,
subject: Summary of Spacecraft 20 Changes.
January 14
Mercury spacecraft 15A was redesignated 15B and allocated as a backup
for the MA-9 mission. In the event Mercury-Atlas 10 (MA-10) were flown,
15B would be the prime spacecraft. Modifications were started
immediately with respect to the hand controller rigging procedures,
pitch and yaw control valves, and other technical changes.
Memo, Wilbur Allaback to Kenneth Vogel, Engineering
Operations, Mercury Project Office, subject: Project Mercury
Spacecraft, Jan. 31, 1963.
The Manned Spacecraft Center presented the proposal to NASA
Headquarters that the ground light visibility experiment of the Schirra
flight (MA-8) be repeated for the Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9) mission.
Objectives were to determine the capability of an astronaut visually to
aquire a ground light of known intensity while in orbit and to evaluate
the visibility of the light as seen from the spacecraft at varying
distances from the light source. Possibly at some later date such
lights could be used as a signal to provide spacecraft of advanced
programs with an earth reference point. This experiment was integrated
as a part of the MA-9 mission.
Memo, Flight Control Operations Division to Mercury
Project Manager, subject: Ground Light Visibility Experiment, Jan. 14,
1963.
January 17
Asked by a Congressional committee if NASA planned another Mercury
flight after MA-9, Dr. Robert C. Seamans stated, in effect, that
schedules for the original Mercury program and the 1-day orbital effort
were presumed to be completed in fiscal year 1963. If sufficient test
data were not accumulated in the MA-9 flight, backup launch vehicles
and spacecraft were available to fulfill requirements.
NASA Historical Office, Astronautics and
Aeronautics Chronology, January 1963.
January 21
After reviewing the MA-9 spacecraft system and mission rules, the
Simulations Section reported the drafting of a simulator training plan
for the flight. Approximately 20 launch reentry missions were
scheduled, plus variations of these missions as necessary. Instruction
during the simulated orbital period consisted of attitude and fuel
consumption studies, and from time to time fault insertions would be
integrated to provide a complete range of activities covering all
mission objectives. By the end of April 1963, the pilot and backup
pilot had accumulated 50 hours in the simulators.
Memo, Simulation Operations Section to Assistant
Chief for Training, subject: MA-9 Astronaut Training, Jan. 21, 1963;
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury (MODM Project) [Quarterly] Status
Report No. 18 for Period Ending April 30, 1963.
January 22
McDonnell Aircraft Corporation reported to the Manned Spacecraft Center
on a study conducted to ascertain temperature effects on the spacecraft
as a result of white paint patch experiments. On both the MA-7 and MA-8
spacecraft, a 6-inch by 6-inch white patch was painted to compare
shingle temperatures with an oxidized surface; the basic objective was
to obtain a differential temperature measurement between the two
surfaces, which were about 6 inches apart. Differences in spacecraft
structural points prevented the tests from being conclusive, but the
recorded temperatures during the flights were different enough to
determine that the painted surfaces were cooler at points directly
beneath the patch and on a corresponding point inside the spacecraft.
According to McDonnell's analytical calculations, white painted
spacecraft were advantageous for extended-range missions. However,
McDonnell pointed out the necessity for further study, since one
limited test was not conclusive.
Letter, McDonnell Aircraft to NASA-MSC, subject:
Contract NAS 5-59, Project Mercury, Models 133K and L, Results of
McDonnell MMS-450 Type II White Paint on MA-7 and MA-8 Flights, Jan.
22, 1963.
January 26
Specialty assignments were announced by the Manned Spacecraft Center
for its astronaut team: L. Gordon Cooper, Alan B. Shepard, pilot phases
of Project Mercury; Virgil I. Grissom, Project Gemini; John H. Glenn,
Project Apollo; M. Scott Carpenter, lunar excursion training; Walter M.
Schirra, Gemini and Apollo operations and training; Donald K. Slayton,
remained in duties assigned in September 1962 as Coordinator of
Astronaut Activities. These assignments superseded those of July 1959.
Assignments of the new flight-crew members selected on September 17,
1962, were as follows: Neil A. Armstrong, trainers and simulators;
Frank Borman, boosters; Charles Conrad, cockpit layout and systems
integration; James A. Lovell, recovery systems; James A. McDivitt,
guidance and navigation; Elliott M. See, electrical, sequential, and
mission planning; Thomas P. Stafford, communications, instrumentation,
and range integration; Edward H. White, flight control systems; John W.
Young, environmental control systems, personal and survival equipment.
MSC Release 63-11, Jan. 26, 1963.
January 27
John A. Powers, Public Affairs Officer, Manned Spacecraft Center, told
an audience of Texas Associated Press managing editors that Gordon
Cooper's MA-9 flight might go as many as 22 orbits, lasting 34 hours.
Associated Press Release, Jan. 28, 1963.
February 1
Kenneth S. Kleinknecht, Manager, Mercury Project Office, reported the
cancellation of a peroxide expulsion experiment previously planned for
the MA-9 mission. Kleinknecht noted the zodiacal light experiment would
proceed and that the astronaut's gloves were being modified to
facilitate camera operation.
MSC Staff Meeting, Feb. 1, 1963.
February 5
Manned Spacecraft Center officials announced a delay of the MA-9
scheduled flight data due to electrical wiring problems in the Atlas
launch vehicle control system.
MSC Release 63-20, Feb. 5, 1963.
February 5-14
Personnel of the Manned Spacecraft Center visited the McDonnell plant
in St. Louis to conduct a spacecraft status review. Units being
inspected were spacecrafts 15B and 20. In addition, the status of the
Gemini Simulator Instructor Console was assessed. With regard to the
spacecraft inspection portion, a number of modifications had been made
that would affect the simulator trainers. On spacecraft 15B, 15
modifications were made to the control panel and interior, including
the relocation of the water separator lights, the addition of water
spray and radiation experiment switches and a retropack battery switch.
The exterior of the spacecraft underwent changes as well, involving
such modifications as electrical connections and redesign of the fuel
system for the longer mission. The reviewers found that spacecraft 20
conformed closely to the existing simulator configuration, so that
modifications to the simulator were unnecessary.
Memo, Simulator Operations Section to Assistant Chief
for Training, subject: Mercury Spacecraft Status Review, March 5, 1963.
February 7
At a Development Engineering Inspection for the spacecraft 15B mockup,
designated for the MA-10 mission, some 42 requests for alterations were
listed.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury (MODM Project)
[Quarterly] Status Report No. 18 for Period Ending April 30, 1963.
February 12
Objectives of the Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9) manned 1-day mission were
published. This was the ninth flight of a production Mercury spacecraft
to be boosted by an Atlas launch vehicle and the sixth manned United
States space flight. According to plans, MA-9 would complete almost 22
orbits and be recovered approximately 70 nautical miles from Midway
Island in the Pacific Ocean. Primary objectives of the flight were to
evaluate the effects of the space environment on an astronaut after
more than 1 but less than 2 days in orbit. During this period, close
attention would be given to the astronaut's ability to function as a
primary operating system of the spacecraft while in a sustained period
of weightlessness. The capability of the spacecraft to perform over the
extended period of time would be closely monitored. From postflight
information, data would be available from the pilot and the spacecraft
to ascertain, to a degree, the feasibility of space flights over a much
greater period of time—Project Gemini, for example. In addition, the
extended duration of the MA-9 mission provided a check on the
effectiveness of the worldwide tracking network that could assist in
determining the tracking requirement for the advanced manned space
flight programs.
NASA Project Mercury Working Paper No. 232, subject:
Manned One-Day Mission Directive for Mercury-Atlas 9 (M-9, spacecraft
20), Feb. 12, 1963.
The Manned Spacecraft Center announced a mid-May flight for
Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9). Originally scheduled for April, the launch date
was delayed by a decision to rewire the Mercury-Atlas flight control
system, as a result of the launch vehicle checkout at the plant
inspection meeting.
MSC Release 63-26, Feb. 12, 1963.
February 18-22
The McDonnell Aircraft Corporation reported to the Manned Spacecraft
Center on the results of Project Orbit Run 109. This test run completed
a 100-hour full-scale simulated mission, less the reaction control
system operation, to demonstrate the 1-day mission capability of the
Mercury spacecraft. Again, as in earlier runs, the MA-9/20 flight plan
served as the guideline, including the use of onboard supplies of
electrical power, oxygen, and coolant water, with hardline controls
simulating astronaut functions. During the 2-hour prelaunch hold, a
small leak was suspected in the secondary oxygen system, but at the end
of the hold all systems indicated a “GO” condition and the simulated
launch began. System equipment programing started and was recycled at
the end of each 22 simulated orbits covering 33 mission hours. Test
objectives were attained without any undue difficulty.
Letter, McDonnell Aircraft Corporation to NASA-MSC,
subject: Contract NAS 5-59, Project Mercury, Model 133L, Project Orbit
Spacecraft No. 9A T+ 3 Day Test Report, Category IV-I, Run 109,
Transmittal of, March 5, 1963.
February 20
Kenneth S. Kleinknecht, Manager, Mercury Project Office, commented on
the first anniversary of the Glenn flight (MA-6) that 1,144.51 minutes
of orbital space time had been logged by the three manned missions to
date. These flights proved that man could perform in a space
environment and was an important and integral part of the mission. In
addition, the flights proved the design of the spacecraft to be
technically sound. With the excellent cooperation extended by the
Department of Defense, other government elements, industry, and
academic institutions, a high level of confidence and experience was
accrued for the coming Gemini and Apollo projects.
MSC Release 63-20, Feb. 20, 1963.
The Smithsonian Institution received the Friendship 7 spacecraft
(MA-6 Glenn flight) in a formal presentation ceremony from Dr. Hugh L.
Dryden, the NASA Deputy Administrator. Astronaut John Glenn presented
his flight suit, boots, gloves, and a small American flag that he
carried on the mission.
Information supplied by Albert M. Chop, Deputy Public
Affairs Officer, Public Affairs Office, MSC, Feb. 21, 1963.
In announcing a realignment of the structure of the Office of Manned
Space Flight, Director D. Brainerd Holmes named two new deputy
directors and outlined a changed reporting structure. Dr. Joseph F.
Shea was appointed Deputy Director for Systems, and George M. Low
assumed duties as Deputy Director for Office of Manned Space Flight
Programs. Reporting to Dr. Shea would be Director of Systems Studies,
Dr. William A. Lee; Director of Systems Engineering, John A. Gautrand;
and Director of Integration and Checkout, James E. Sloan. Reporting to
Low would be Director of Launch Vehicles, Milton Rosen; Director of
Space Medicine, Dr. Charles Roadman; and Director of Spacecraft and
Flight Missions, presently vacant. Director of Administration, William
E. Lilly, would provide administrative support in both major areas.
February 21
Gordon Cooper and Alan Shepard, pilot and backup pilot, respectively,
for the Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9) mission, received a 1-day briefing on
all experiments approved for the flight. Also at this time, all
hardware and operational procedures to handle the experiments were
established.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury (MODM Project)
[Quarterly] Status Report No. 18 for Period Ending April 30, 1963.
The McDonnell Aircraft Corporation notified the Manned Spacecraft
Center that the ultra high frequency transceivers were being prepared
for the astronaut when in the survival raft. During tests of these
components, an effective range of 5 to 10 miles had been anticipated,
but the actual average range recorded by flyovers was 12 miles. Later,
some faults were discovered in the flyover monitoring equipment, so
that with adjustments the average range output was approximately 20
miles.
Letter, McDonnell Aircraft Corporation to NASA-MSC,
subject: Contract NAS 5-59, Project Mercury, Model 133L, UHF
Transceiver Power Output, Feb. 21, 1963.
February 23
Manned Spacecraft Center checkout and special hardware installation at
Cape Canaveral on spacecraft 20 were scheduled for completion as of
this date. However, work tasks were extended for a 2-week period
because of the deletion of certain experimental hardware—zero g
experiment and new astronaut couch. In addition, some difficulties were
experienced while testing the space reaction control system and
environmental control system.
Activity Report, MSC-Atlantic Missile Range
Operations, January 27-February 23, 1963.
February (during the month)
The Air Force Aeronautical Chart and Information Center published the
22-orbit version of the worldwide Mercury tracking chart. The version
of August 1962 covered 18 orbits.
Mercury Orbit Chart MOC-6, 1st ed., USAF Aeronautical
Chart and Information Center, Feb. 1963.
March 1
Spacecraft 9A, configured for manned 1-day mission requirements,
completed Project Orbit Run 110. For this test, only the reaction
control system was exercised; as a result of the run, several
modifications were made involving pressurization and fuel systems.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury (MODM Project)
[Quarterly] Status Report No. 18 for Period Ending April 30, 1963.
March 5
NASA Headquarters published a study on the ejection of an instrument
package from an orbiting spacecraft. By properly selecting the ejection
parameters, the package could be positioned to facilitate various
observation experiments. From this experiment, if successful, the
observation acuity, both visual and electrical, could be determined;
this data would assist the rendezvous portion of the Gemini flights.
NASA General Working Paper No. 10,005, subject:
Parametric Study of Separation Distance and Velocity between a
Spacecraft and an Ejected Object, March 5, 1963.
March 11
Based on a request from the Manned Spacecraft Center, McDonnell
submitted a review of clearances between the Mercury spacecraft 15B
retropack and the launch vehicle adapter during separation maneuvers.
This review was prompted by the fact that additional batteries and a
water tank had been installed on the sides of the retropack. According
to the McDonnell study the clearance safety margin was quite adequate.
Letter, McDonnell Aircraft Corporation to NASA MSC,
subject: Contract NAS 5-59, Project Mercury, Model 133L,
Retropack-Adapter Clearance Study, March 11, 1963.
March 15
Factory roll-out inspection of Atlas launch vehicle 130 was conducted
at General Dynamics some 15 days later than planned. Delay was due to a
re-work on the flight control wiring. After the launch vehicle passed
inspection, shipment was made to Cape Canaveral on March 18, 1963, (see
fig. 66) and the launch vehicle was erected on the pad on March 21,
1963.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury (MODM Project)
[Quarterly] Status Report No. 18 for Period Ending April 30, 1963.
 |
Figure 66. Atlas launch
vehicle 130-D (MA-9) undergoing inspection at Cape Canaveral.
|
March 19
The Manned Spacecraft Center received a slow-scan television camera
system, fabricated by Lear Siegler, Incorporated, for integration with
the Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9) mission. This equipment, weighing 8 pounds,
could be focused on the pilot or used by the astronaut on other objects
inside the spacecraft or to pick up exterior views. Ground support was
installed at three locations—Mercury Control Center, the Canary
Islands, and the Pacific Command Ship—to receive and transmit
pictures of Cooper's flight. Transmission capabilities were one picture
every 2 seconds.
MSC Release 63-52, March 19, 1963.
March 22
The National Rocket Club presented to John Glenn, pilot of America's
first orbital manned space flight, the Robert H. Goddard trophy for
1963 for his achievement in assisting the advance of missile, rocket,
and space flight programs.
MSC Release 63-54, March 20, 1963.
March 28
For the purpose of reviewing the MA-9 acceleration profile, pilot
Gordon Cooper and backup pilot Alan Shepard received runs on the
Johnsville centrifuge.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury (MODM Project)
[Quarterly] Status Report No. 18 for Period Ending April 30, 1963.
April 5-6
Gordon Cooper and Alan Shepard, MA-9 pilot and backup pilot, visited
the Morehead Planetarium in North Carolina to review the celestial
sphere model, practice star navigation, and observe a simulation of the
flashing light beacon (an experiment planned for the MA-9 mission).
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury (MODM Project)
[Quarterly] Status Report No. 18 for Period Ending April 30, 1963.
April 9
Langley Research Center personnel visited Cape Canaveral to provide
assistance in preparing the tethered balloon experiment for the
Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9) mission. This work involved installing force
measuring beams, soldered at four terminals, to which the lead wires
were fastened.
Memo, Thomas Vranas to Associate Director, Langley
Research Center, subject: Trip to Cape Canaveral to Rectify
Difficulties in Strain Gage Instrumentation, April 25, 1963.
April 10-11
Full-scale recovery and egress training was conducted for Gordon Cooper
and Alan Shepard in preparation for the MA-9 mission. During the
exercise, egresses were effected from the spacecraft with subsequent
helicopter pickup and dinghy boarding. The deployment and use of
survival equipment were also practiced.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury (MODM Project)
[Quarterly] Status Report No. 18 for Period Ending April 30, 1963.
April 15
The Manned Spacecraft Center published a detailed flight plan, and the
assumption was made that the mission would be nominal, with any
required changes being made by the flight director. Scheduled
experiments, observations, and studies would be conducted in a manner
that would not conflict with the operational requirements. Due to the
extended duration of the flight, an 8-hour sleep period was programed,
with a 2-hour option factor as to when the astronaut would begin his
rest period. This time came well within the middle phases of the
planned flight and would allow the astronaut ample opportunity to be in
an alert state before retro-sequence. In addition to the general
guidelines, the astronaut had practically a minute-to-minute series of
tasks to accomplish.
MA-9/20 Flight Plan, prepared by Spacecraft
Operations Branch, Flight Crew Operations Division, MSC, April 15,
1963.
April 16-17
An MA-9 mission briefing was conducted for the astronauts and Mercury
support personnel. Subjects under discussion included recovery
procedures, network communications, spacecraft systems, flight plan
activities, and mission rules.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury (MODM Project)
[Quarterly] Status Report No. 18 for Period Ending April 30, 1963.
April 20
The final water condensate tank was installed in spacecraft 20 for the
MA-9 mission. In all, the system consisted of a 4-pound, built-in tank,
a 3.6 pound auxiliary tank located under the couch head, and six
1-pound auxiliary plastic containers. The total capacity for condensate
water storage was 13.6 pounds. In operation, the astronaut hand-pumped
the fluid to the 3.6 pound tank to avoid spilling moisture inside the
cabin from the built-in tank. Then the 1-pound containers were
available.
Report, subject: Project Mercury Weekly Report 29,
Spacecraft 20, April 21-27, 1963.
April 22
Spacecraft 20 was moved from Hanger S at Cape Canaveral to Complex 14
and mated to Atlas launch vehicle 130-D in preparation for the
Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9) mission. The first simulated flight test was
begun immediately.
Report, subject: Project Mercury Weekly Report 29,
Spacecraft 20, April 21-27, 1963.
The Bendix Corporation reported to the Manned Spacecraft Center that
it had completed the design and fabrication of an air lock for the
Mercury spacecraft. This component was designed to collect
micrometeorites during orbital flight. Actually the air lock could
accommodate a wide variety of experiments, such as ejecting objects
into space and into reentry trajectories, and exposing objects to a
space environment for observation and retrieval for later study.
Because of the modular construction, the air lock could be adapted to
the Gemini and Apollo spacecraft.
Letter, Bendix Corporation to NASA-MSC, subject:
Bendix Utica Air Lock for Mercury Spacecraft, April 22, 1963, with
inclosures.
Scott Carpenter told an audience at the American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics' Second Manned Space Flight Meeting in
Dallas, Texas, that the Mercury program would culminate with the 1-day
mission of Gordon Cooper.
Paper, subject: Flight Experiences in the Mercury
Program, presented by M. Scott Carpenter, NASA MSC at the AIAA 2nd
Manned Space Flight Meeting, Dallas, Texas, April 22, 1963.
After spacecraft 20 was mated to Atlas launch vehicle 130-D, a
prelaunch electrical mate and abort test and a joint flight
compatibility test were made. During the latter, some difficulty
developed in the flight control gyro canisters, causing replacement of
the components; a rerun of this portion of the test was scheduled for
May 1, 1963.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury (MODM Project)
[Quarterly] Status Report No. 18 for Period Ending April 30, 1963.
April 30
As of this date, a number of improvements had been made to the Mercury
pressure suit for the Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9) flight. (See fig. 67.)
These included a mechanical seal for the helmet, new gloves with an
improved inner-liner and link netting between the inner and outer
fabrics at the wrist, and an increased mobility torso section. The MA-9
boots were integrated with the suit to provide additional comfort for
the longer mission, to reduce weight, and to provide an easier and
shorter donning time. Another change relocated the life vest from the
center of the chest to a pocket on the lower left leg. This
modification removed the bulkiness from the front of the suit and
provided for more comfort during the flight. These are but a few of the
changes.
NASA-MSC Report, Project Mercury (MODM Project)
[Quarterly] Status Report No. 18 for Period Ending April 30, 1963;
information supplied by James McBarron, Crew Systems Division, MSC, May
13, 1963.
 |
Figure 67. Flight
pressure suit of astronaut L. Gordon Cooper used in MA-9, 22-orbit
mission. Compare with flight pressure suit of astronaut Alan Shepard in
MR-3 suborbital flight in figure 37. |
May 12
Dr. Charles A. Berry, Chief, Aerospace Medical Operations Office,
Manned Spacecraft Center, pronounced Gordon Cooper in excellent mental
and physical condition for the upcoming Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9) mission.
MA-9 Advisory, Mercury Atlantic News Center, May 12,
1963.
May 12-19
Some 1,020 reporters, commentators, technicians, and others of the news
media from the U.S. and several foreign countries gathered at Cape
Canaveral, with another 130 at the NASA News Center in Hawaii, to cover
the Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9) mission. Over the course of these days at
Cape Canaveral, Western Union estimated that approximately 600,000
words of copy were filed, of which 140,000 were transmitted to European
media. This does not include stories phoned in by reporters nor copy
filed from the Pacific News Center, or for radio and TV coverage.
During the 546,167-statute-mile flight, television audiences could see
the astronaut or views inside and outside the spacecraft from time to
time. Approximately 1 hour and 58 minutes were programed. Visual
coverage was relayed to Europe via satellites.
Observed by author; Western Union statistics supplied
by John J. Peterson, Manager, Mercury Atlantic News Center, May 19,
1963.
May 14
An attempt was made to launch Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9), but difficulty
developed in the fuel pump of the diesel engine used to pull the gantry
away from the launch vehicle. This involved a delay of approximately
129 minutes after the countdown had reached T-60 minutes. After these
repairs were effected, failure at the Bermuda tracking station of a
computer converter, important in the orbital insertion decision, forced
the mission to be canceled at T-13 minutes. At 6:00 p.m. e.d.t., Walter
C. Williams reported that the Bermuda equipment had been repaired, and
the mission was rescheduled for May 15, 1963.
May 15-16
Scheduled for a 22-orbit mission, Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9), designated
Faith 7, was launched from Cape Canaveral at 8:04 a.m. e.d.t., with
astronaut L. Gordon Cooper as the pilot. (See fig. 68.) Cooper entered
the spacecraft at 5:33 a.m. the morning of May 15, and it was announced
over Mercury Control by Lt. Colonel John A. Powers that “barring
unforeseen technical difficulties the launch would take place at 8:00
a.m. e.d.t.” As a note of interest, Cooper reported that he took a
brief nap while awaiting the launch. The countdown progressed without
incident until T-11 minutes and 30 seconds when some difficulty
developed in the guidance equipment and a brief hold was called. Later,
a momentary hold was called at T-19 seconds to determine whether the
systems went into automatic sequencing, which occurred as planned. The
liftoff was excellent, and visual tracking could be made for about 2
minutes through a cloudless sky. The weather was considerably clearer
than on the day before. The Faith 7 flight sequencing—booster engine
cut off, escape tower jettison, sustainer engine cut off—operated
perfectly and the spacecraft was inserted into orbit at 8:09 a.m.
e.d.t. at a speed that was described as almost unbelievably correct.
The perigee of the flight was about 100.2 statute miles, the apogee was
165.9, and Faith 7 attained a maximum orbital speed of 17,546.6 miles
per hour. During the early part of the flight, Cooper was busily
engaged in adjusting his suit and cabin temperatures, which were
announced as 92 degrees and 109 degrees F, respectively, well within
the tolerable range. By the second orbit, temperature conditions were
quite comfortable, so much so, in fact, that the astronaut took a short
nap. During the third orbit, Cooper deployed the flashing light
experiment successfully and reported that he was able to see the
flashing beacon on the night side of the fourth orbit. Thus Cooper
became the first man to launch a satellite (the beacon) while in
orbital flight. Another experiment was attempted after 9 hours in
flight, during the sixth orbit, when Cooper tried to deploy a balloon
but this attempt met with failure. A second deployment effort met with
the same results. During this same orbit (sixth), the astronaut
reported that he saw a ground light in South Africa and the town from
which it emanated. This was an experiment to evaluate an astronaut's
capability to observe a light of known intensity and to relate its
possible applications to the Gemini and Apollo programs, especially as
it pertained to the landing phases. After the beginning of the eighth
orbit, Faith 7 entered a period of drifting flight—that is, the
astronaut did not exercise his controls—and this drifting condition
was programed through the fifteenth orbit. Some drifting flight had
already been accomplished. Since the astronaut's sleep-option period
was scheduled for this flight phase, Cooper advised the telemetry
command ship, Rose Knot Victor off the coast of Chile, just
before the ninth orbit that he planned to begin his rest period. The
astronaut contacted John Glenn off the coast of Japan while in the
ninth orbit, but lapsed into sleep shortly after entering the 10th
orbit. During his sleep period, suit temperature rose slightly, and the
astronaut roused, reset the control, and resumed his rest. Cooper
contacted Muchea, Australia, during the 14th orbit after a restful
night of drifting flight and resumed his work program. He reported just
before entering the 17th orbit that he was attempting to photograph the
zodiacal light. While in the 19th orbit, the first spacecraft
malfunction of concern occurred when the .05g light appeared on the
instrument panel as Cooper was adjusting the cabin light dimmer switch.
The light, sensitive to gravity, normally lights during reentry. The
flight director instructed Cooper to power up his attitude control
system and to relay information on attitude indications reception on
his gyros. All telemetry data implied that there had been no orbital
decay and that the speed of Faith 7 was correct. The obvious conclusion
was that the light was erroneous. Inspectors were later of the opinion
that water in the system had caused a short circuit and had tripped a
relay, causing the light to appear. Because of this condition, the
flight director believed that certain portions of the automatic system
would not work during reentry, and the astronaut was advised to reenter
in the manual mode, becoming the first American to use this method
exclusively for reentry. During the reentry operation, Cooper fired the
retrorockets manually, by pushing a button for the first of three
rockets to start the sequence. He attained the proper reentry attitude
by using his observation window scribe marks to give proper reference
with the horizon and to determine if he were rolling. John Glenn,
aboard the command ship off the Japanese coast provided the countdown
for the retrosequence and also advised Cooper when to jettison the
retropack. The main chute deployed at 11,000 feet. Faith 7 landed 7,000
yards from the prime recovery ship, the carrier USS Kearsarge,
after a 34-hour, 19-minute, and 49-second space flight. Cooper did not
egress from the spacecraft until he was hoisted aboard the carrier. The
mission was an unqualified success. During the flight the use of
consumables—electrical power, oxygen, and attitude fuel—ran
considerably below the flight plan. On the 15th orbit 75 percent of the
primary supply of oxygen remained, and the reserve supply was
untouched. The unusual low consumption rate of all supplies prompted
teasing by the Faith 7 communicators. They called the astronaut a
“miser” and requested that he “stop holding his breath.”
MA-9 Transcript, May 15, 1963.
 |
Figure 68. Astronaut L.
Gordon Cooper prepares for insertion in Faith 7 (MA-9) atop
Mercury-Atlas gantry for 22-orbit flight. |
May 15
As of this date, the number of contractor personnel at Cape Canaveral
directly involved in supporting Project Mercury were as follows:
McDonnell, 251 persons for Contract NAS 5-59 and 23 persons for
spacecraft 15B (MA-10 work); Federal Electric Corporation, 8. This
report corresponded with the launch date of astronaut Gordon Cooper in
the Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9).
Memo, Harold G. Collins, Contracting Officer, to
Director for Mission Requirements, subject: MSC/Cape Monthly Report on
Contractor Personnel Headcount, May 17, 1963.
May 19
On a national televised press conference, emanating from Cocoa Beach,
Florida, astronaut Gordon Cooper reviewed his experiences aboard the
Faith 7 during the Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9) mission. Cooper, in his
discussion, proceeded systematically throughout the mission from
countdown through recovery. He opened his comments by complimenting
Calvin Fowler of General Dynamics for his fine job on the console
during the Atlas launching. During the flight, he reported that he saw
the haze layer formerly mentioned by Schirra during the Sigma 7 flight
(MA-8) and John Glenn's “fireflies” (MA-6). As for the sleep portion,
Cooper felt he had answered with finality the question of whether sleep
was possible in space flight. He also mentioned that he had to anchor
his thumbs to the helmet restraint strap to prevent his arms from
floating, which might accidently trip a switch. Probably the most
astonishing feature was his ability visually to distinguish objects on
the earth. He spoke of seeing an African town where the flashing light
experiment was conducted; he saw several Australian cities, including
the large oil refineries at Perth; he saw wisps of smoke from rural
houses on the Asiatic Continent; and he mentioned seeing Miami Beach,
Florida, and the Clear Lake area near Houston. With reference to
particular problems while in flight, the astronaut told of the
difficulties he experienced with the condensate water pumping system.
During the conference, when Dr. Robert C. Seamans was asked about the
possibilities of a Mercury-Atlas 10 (MA-10) flight, he replied that “It
is quite unlikely.”
MA-9 Press Conference, May 19, 1963.
May 21
In a White House ceremony, President John F. Kennedy presented
astronaut Gordon Cooper with the NASA Distinguished Service Medal.
Other members of the Mercury operations team receiving medals for
outstanding leadership were as follows: G. Merritt Preston, Manager of
Project Mercury Operations at Cape Canaveral; Floyd L Thompson, Langley
Research Center; Kenneth S. Kleinknecht, Manager of the Mercury Project
Office; Christopher C. Kraft, Director of Flight Operations Division,
Manned Spacecraft Center; and Major General Leighton I. Davis,
Commander, Air Force Missile Test Center.
NASA Historical Office, Astronautics and
Aeronautics, May 1963.
May 22
President Kennedy at a regular press conference responded to a question
regarding the desirability of another Mercury flight by saying that
NASA should and would make that final judgement.
Transcript, New York Times, May 23, 1963, p.
18.
May 24
William M. Bland, Deputy Manager, Mercury Project Office, told an
audience at the Aerospace Writers' Association Convention at Dallas,
Texas, that “contrary to common belief, the Mercury spacecraft
consumables have never been stretched like a rubber band to their limit
in performing any of the missions.” He pointed out that consumables
such as electrical power, coolant water, oxygen, and carbon dioxide
absorption were always available with large safety margins at the close
of the flights. For example, astronaut Walter Schirra had a 9-hour
primary oxygen supply at the end of his flight.
Paper, William M. Bland, Jr. and Lewis R. Fisher,
Project Mercury Experience.
May 29
The Department of Defense submitted a summary of its support of the
Mercury-Atlas 9 (MA-9) mission, with a notation that the department was
prepared to provide support for the MA-10 launch. Other than the
provision of the Atlas launch vehicle, the Department of Defense
supplied the Air Force Coastal Sentry Quebec, positioned south
of Japan to monitor and backup retrofire for orbits 6, 7, 21, and 22.
In the southeast Pacific, the Atlantic Missile Range telemetry command
ship Rose Knot Victor was positioned to provide command coverage
for orbits 8 and 13. At a point between Cape Canaveral and Bermuda, the
Atlantic Missile Range C-band radar ship Twin Falls Victory was
stationed for reentry tracking, while the Navy's Range Tracker
out of the Pacific Missile Range provided similar services in the
Pacific. Other Department of Defense communications support included
fixed island stations and aircraft from the several services. Rear
Admiral Harold G. Bowen was in command of Task Force 140, positioned in
the Atlantic Ocean in the event of recovery in that area. In addition,
aircraft were available at strategic spots for sea recovery or recovery
on the American or African Continents. In the Pacific, recovery Task
Force 130, under the command of Rear Admiral C.A. Buchanan, was
composed of one aircraft carrier and 10 destroyers. This force was
augmented by aircraft in contingency recovery areas at Hickam; Midway
Island; Kwajalein; Guam; Tachikawa, Japan; Naha, Okinawa; Clark Field,
Phillippines; Singapore; Perth, Australia; Townsville; Nandi; Johnston
Island; and Tahiti. Pararescuemen were available at all points except
Kwajalein. The Middle East recovery forces (Task Force 109) were under
the direction of Rear Admiral B.J. Semes and consisted of a seaplane
tender and two destroyers supported by aircraft out of Aden, Nairobe,
Maritius, and Singapore for contingency recovery operations. For
bioastronautic support, the Department of Defense deployed 78 medical
personnel, had 32 specialty team members on standby, committed 9
department hospitals and provided over 3,400 pounds of medical
equipment. During the actual recovery, the spacecraft was sighted by
the carrier USS Kearsarge (Task Force 130), and helicopters were
deployed to circle the spacecraft during its final descent. Swimmers
dropped from the helicopters to fix the flotation collar and retrieve
the antenna fairing. Cooper remained in his spacecraft until he was
hoisted aboard the carrier. A motor whaleboat towed the spacecraft
alongside the ship.
Letter, Major General L.I. Davis, Department of
Defense Representative Project Mercury/Gemini Support Operations, to
Hon. Robert S. McNamara, Secretary of Defense, subject: Department of
Defense Support of Project Mercury Manned One-Day Mission (MA-9), May
29, 1963.
Astronaut Gordon Cooper became the sixth Mercury astronaut to be
presented with Astronaut Wings by his respective service.
NASA Historical Office, Astronautics and
Aeronautics, May 1963.
June 6-7
Officials of the Manned Spacecraft Center made a presentation to NASA
Administrator James E. Webb, outlining the benefits of continuing
Project Mercury at least through the Mercury_Atlas 10 (MA-10) mission.
They thought that the spacecraft was capable of much longer missions
and that much could be learned about the effects of space environment
from a mission lasting several days. This information could be applied
to the forthcoming Projects Gemini and Apollo and could be gained
rather cheaply since the MA-10 launch vehicle and spacecraft were
available and nearing a flight readiness status.
MSC Weekly Activity Report, June 2-8, 1963.
June 8
In preparation for the Mercury-Atlas 10 (MA-10) mission, should the
flight be approved by NASA Headquarters, several environmental control
system changes were made in spacecraft 15B. Particularly involved were
improvements in the hardware and flexibility of the urine and
condensate systems. With regard to the condensate portion, Gordon
Cooper, in his press conference, indicated that the system was not easy
to operate during the flight of Faith 7 (MA-9).
MSC Weekly Activity Report, June 2-8, 1963.
June 12
Testifying before the Senate Space Committee, James E. Webb, the NASA
Administrator, said: “There will be no further Mercury shots . . .” He
felt that the manned space flight energies and personnel should focus
on the Gemini and Apollo programs. Thus, after a period of 4 years, 8
months, and 1 week, Project Mercury, America's first manned space
flight program, came to a close.
MSC, Space News Roundup, June 26, 1963.
MERCURY-LITTLE JOE MISSION AND
TEST OBJECTIVES |
Mission |
Launch Date | Objectives |
LJ-6 | October 4, 1959 | (a) To
qualify the aerodynamics and structural integrity of the booster and
the mechanical performance of the launcher.
(b) To check the performance of the system for transmitting a
command signal from the ground station, receiving it in the booster
during flight, and setting of an explosive system at the head end of
each main rocket motor in the booster. |
LJ-1A | November 4, 1959 | (a) To
carry out a planned abort of the spacecraft from the booster at the
maximum dynamic pressure anticipated during Mercury-Atlas exit flight.
(b) To obtain added reliability data on the Mercury drogue and main
parachute operation.
(c) To study spacecraft impact behavior.
(d) To gain further operational experience in recovery of a
floating spacecraft, utilizing a surface vessel.
(e) To obtain further experience and confidence in the operation of
the booster command thrust termination system.
(f) To recover escape motor and tower. |
LJ-2
Primate aboard |
December 4, 1959 | (a) To carry out a
planned escape of the spacecraft from the booster at high altitude
(96,000 ft) just prior to main booster rocket motor burnout.
(b) To ascertain spacecraft entry dynamics for an uncontrolled
entry.
(c) To check spacecraft dynamic stability on descent through the
atmosphere without a drogue parachute.
(d) To determine the physiological and phychological effects of
acceleration and weightlessness on a small primate (rhesus monkey).
(e) To obtain additional reliability data on the operation of the
Mercury parachutes.
(f) To obtain more data on Mercury spacecraft flotation
characteristics in sea areas typical of those planned for use as
recovery areas.
(g) To obtain additional operational experience of spacecraft
recovery by a surface vessel. |
LJ-1B
Primate aboard |
January 21, 1960 | (a) To check out the
Mercury escape system concept and hardware at the maximum dynamic
pressure anticipated during a Mercury-Atlas exit flight.
(b) To determine the effects of simulated Atlas abort accelerations
on a small primate (female rhesus monkey).
(c) To obtain further reliability data on the Mercury spacecraft
drogue and main chute operations.
(d) To check out the operational effectiveness of spacecraft
recovery by helicopter.
(e) To recover the escape-system assembly (escape motor and tower)
for a postflight examination in order to establish whether there had
been any component malfunction or structure failure. |
LJ-5A | March 18, 1961 | (a)
Demonstrate the structural integrity of the Mercury spacecraft and
escape system during an escape initiated at the highest dynamic
pressure that can be anticipated during an Atlas launch for orbital
flight.
(b) Demonstrate the performance of the spacecraft escape system,
the sequential system, and the recovery system.
(c) Determine the flight dynamic characteristics of the Mercury
spacecraft in an escape maneuver.
(d) Demonstrate the performance of a particular landing-bag
configuration.
(e) Establish the adequacy of the spacecraft recovery procedures.
(f) Establish prelaunch checkout procedures for the functioning
spacecraft systems.
(g) Determine the effects of the flight profile on the spacecraft
equipment and systems not otherwise required for the first-order test
objectives. |
LJ-5B | April 28, 1961 | (a)
Demonstrate the structural integrity of the Mercury spacecraft and
escape system during an escape initiated at the highest dynamic
pressure that can be anticipated during an Atlas launch for orbital
flight.
(b) Demonstrate the performance of the spacecraft escape system,
the sequential system, landing system, and the recovery system.
(c) Determine the flight dynamic characteristics of the Mercury
spacecraft in an escape maneuver.
(d) Establish the adequacy of the spacecraft recovery procedures.
(e) Establish prelaunch checkout procedures for the functioning
spacecraft systems.
(f) Determine the effects of the flight profile on the spacecraft
equipment and systems not otherwise required for first-order test
objectives. |
MERCURY BEACH ABORT TEST
OBJECTIVES |
Mission |
Launch Date | Objectives |
Beach Abort
(Boilerplate spacecraft) |
May 9, 1960 | (a) Demonstrate capability
of escape system, landing system, and postlanding equipment during an
off-the-pad abort.
(b) Demonstrate structural integrity of escape configuration during
an off-the-pad abort.
(c) Provide time history data for the following parameters: (1)
altitude, (2) range, (3) velocity, (4) pitch, roll and yaw angles, (5)
pitch, roll and yaw rates, (6) pitch, roll and yaw accelerations, (7)
impact accelerations, and (8) sequence of events.
(d) Obtain operational experience for checkout, launch and recovery
teams.
(e) Determine the effects of off-the-pad escape and landing
conditions upon the spacecraft telemetry, instrumentation and
communications systems.
(f) Provide time history data for the following parameters: (1)
indicated pressure altitude, (2) outside skin temperature, (3) inside
skin temperature, (4) cabin air temperature, (5) noise level, and (6)
vibration. |
MERCURY-REDSTONE MISSIONS AND TEST
OBJECTIVES |
Mission |
Launch Date | Objectives |
MR-1A
Unmanned | December 19,
1960 | (a) Qualify the
spacecraft-booster combination for the Mercury-Redstone mission which
includes attaining a Mach number of approximately 6.0 during powered
flight, a period of weightlessness of about 5 minutes, and a
deceleration of approximately 11g on reentry.
(b) Qualify the posigrade rockets.
(c) Qualify the recovery system.
(d) Qualify the launch, tracking, and recovery phases of operation.
(e) Qualify the Automatic Stabilization and Control System,
including the Reaction Control System. |
MR-2
Primate aboard |
January 31, 1961 | (a) Obtain
physiological and performance data on a primate in ballistic space
flight.
(b) Qualify the Environmental Control System and aeromedical
instrumentation.
(c) Qualify the landing bag system.
(d) Partially qualify the voice communication system.
(e) Qualify the mechanically-actuated side hatch.
(f) Obtain a closed-loop evaluation of the booster automatic abort
system. |
MR-BD
Booster
Development
Flight | March 24, 1961 | (a) Investigate corrections to booster problems
as a result of the MR-2 flight. These problems were as follows: (1)
Structural feedback to control system producing vane “chatter”. (2)
Instrument compartment vibration. (3) Thrust control malfunction. |
MR-3
Manned | May 5, 1961 | (a) Familiarize man with a brief but complete
space flight experience including the lift-off, powered flight,
weightless flight (for a period of approximately 5 minutes), reentry,
and landing phases of the flight.
(b) Evaluate man's ability to perform as a functional unit during
space flight by: (1) Demonstrating manual control of spacecraft
attitude before, during, and after retrofire. (2) Use of voice
communications during flight.
(c) Study man's physiological reactions during space flight.
(d) Recover the astronaut and spacecraft. |
MR-4
Manned | June 21, 1961 | (a) Familiarize man with a brief but complete
space flight experience including the lift-off, powered flight,
weightless (for a period of approximately 5 minutes), atmospheric
reentry and landing phases of the flight.
(b) Evaluate man's ability to perform as a functional unit during
space flight by: (1) Demonstrating manual control of spacecraft during
weightless periods. (2) Using the spacecraft window and periscope for
attitude reference and recognition of ground check points.
(c) Study man's physiological reactions during space flights.
(d) Qualify the explosively-actuated side egress hatch. |
MERCURY-ATLAS MISSIONS AND TEST
OBJECTIVES |
Mission |
Launch Date | Objectives |
Big Joe I | September 9, 1959 |
(a) To recover the spacecraft.
(b) To determine the performance of the ablation shield and measure
afterbody heating.
(c) To determine the flight dynamic characteristics of the
spacecraft during reentry.
(d) To establish the adequacy of the spacecraft recovery system and
procedures.
(e) To establish the adequacy of recovery aids in assisting the
recovery of the spacecraft.
(f) To conduct familiarization of NASA operating personnel with
Atlas launch procedures.
(g) To evaluate the loads on the spacecraft during the actual
flight environment.
(h) To evaluate operation of the spacecraft control system. |
MA-2 | February 21, 1961 | (a) To
determine the integrity of the spacecraft structure, ablation shield,
and afterbody shingles for a reentry from a critical abort.
(b) To evaluate the performance of the operating spacecraft systems
during the entire flight.
(c) To determine the spacecraft full-scale motions and afterbody
heating rates during reentry from a critical abort.
(d) To evaluate the compatibility of the spacecraft escape systems
with the Mercury-Atlas system.
(e) To establish the adequacy of the location and recovery
procedures.
(f) To determine the closed-loop performance of the Abort Sensing
and Implementation System.
(g) To determine the ability of the Atlas booster to release the
Mercury spacecraft at the position, altitude, and velocity defined by
the guidance equations.
(h) To evaluate the aerodynamic loading vibrational characteristics
and structural integrity of the LO2 boiloff
valve, tank dome, spacecraft adapter and associated structures. |
MA-4 | September 13, 1961 | (a) To
demonstrate the integrity of the spacecraft structure, ablation shield,
and afterbody shingles for a normal reentry from orbital conditions.
(b) To evaluate the performance of the Mercury spacecraft systems
for the entire flight.
(c) To determine the spacecraft motions during a normal reentry
from orbital conditions.
(d) To determine the Mercury spacecraft vibration environment
during flight.
(e) To demonstrate the compatibility of the Mercury spacecraft
escape system with the Mercury-Atlas system.
(f) To determine the ability of the Atlas booster to release the
Mercury spacecraft at the prescribed orbital insertion conditions.
(g) To demonstrate the proper operation of the network ground
command control equipment.
(h) To evaluate the performance of the network equipment and the
operational procedures used in establishing the launch trajectory and
booster cutoff conditions and in predicting landing points.
(i) To evaluate the applicable ground communications network and
procedures.
(j) To evaluate the performance of the network aquisition aids, the
radar tracking system, and the associated operational procedures.
(k) To evaluate the telemetry receiving system performance and the
telemetry displays.
(l) To evaluate the spacecraft recovery operations, as to the
equipment and procedures used for communications and for locating and
recovering the spacecraft, for a landing in the Atlantic Ocean along
the Mercury network.
(m) To obtain data on the repeatability of the booster performance
of all Atlas missile and ground systems.
(n) To determine the magnitude of the booster sustainer/vernier
residual thrust after cutoff.
(o) To evaluate the performance of the Abort Sensing and
Implementation System.
(p) To evaluate and develop applicable Mercury Network countdown
and operational procedures.
(q) To evaluate the Atlas booster with regard to engine start and
potential causes for combustion instability. |
MA-5
Primate aboard |
November 29, 1961 | (a) To demonstrate
the performance of the Environmental Control System by utilizing a
primate during an orbital mission.
(b) To demonstrate satisfactory performance of the spacecraft
systems throughout a Mercury orbital mission.
(c) To determine by detail measurements, the heating rate and the
thermal effects throughout the Mercury spacecraft for all phases of an
orbital mission.
(d) To exercise the satellite clock.
(e) To determine the ability of the Atlas booster to release the
Mercury spacecraft at the prescribed orbital insertion condition.
(f) To demonstrate satisfactory performance of the Mercury Network
in support of an orbital mission.
(g) To demonstrate the ability of the Flight Controllers to
satisfactorily monitor and control an orbital mission.
(h) To demonstrate the adequacy of the recovery plans for an
orbital mission; particular emphasis is required for the spacecraft
occupant.
(i) To evaluate the performance of the Abort Sensing and
Implementation System.
(j) To determine the magnitude of the booster sustainer/vernier
residual thrust or impulse after cutoff.
(k) To obtain data on the repeatability of the booster performance
of all Atlas mission and ground systems.
(l) To evaluate the Mercury Network countdown and operational
procedures.
(m) To evaluate the Atlas booster with regard to engine start and
potential causes for combustion instability. |
MA-6
Manned | February 20,
1962 | (a) To evaluate the performance
of man-spacecraft system in a three-orbit mission.
(b) To evaluate the effects of space flight on the astronaut.
(c) To obtain the astronaut's evaluation of the operational
suitability of the spacecraft and supporting systems for manned space
flight. |
MA-7
Manned | May 24, 1962 | (a) To evaluate the performance of
man-spacecraft system in a three-pass orbital mission.
(b) To evaluate the effects of space flight on the astronaut.
(c) To obtain the astronaut's opinions on the operational
suitability of the spacecraft systems.
(d) To evaluate the performance of spacecraft systems replaced or
modified as a result of previous missions.
(e) To exercise and evaluate further the performance of the Mercury
Worldwide Network. |
MA-8
Manned | October 3,
1962 | (a) To evaluate the performance
of the man-spacecraft system in a six-pass orbital mission.
(b) To evaluate the effects of an extended orbital space flight on
the astronaut and to compare this analysis with those of previous
missions and astronaut-simulator programs.
(c) To obtain additional astronaut evaluation of the operational
suitability of the spacecraft and support systems for manned orbital
flights.
(d) To evaluate the performance of spacecraft systems replaced or
modified as a result of previous three-pass orbital missions.
(e) To evaluate the performance of and exercise further the Mercury
Worldwide Network and mission support forces and to establish their
suitability for extended manned orbital flight. |
MA-9
Manned | May 15, 1963 | (a) To evaluate the effects on the astronaut of
approximately one day in orbital flight.
(b) To verify that man can function for an extended period in space
as a primary operating system fo the spacecraft.
(c) To evaluate in a manned one-day mission the combined
performance of the astronaut and a Mercury spacecraft specifically
modified for the mission. |
Flight | Launch
date | Maximum altitude | Maximum range | Maximum
velocity | Flight
duration
hr:min:sec |
Feet |
Statute
miles | Nautical
miles | Statute
miles | Nautical
miles | Ft/sec
earth-fixed | Ft/sec
space-fixed | Mph
space-fixed |
Big Joe 1 | 9-9-59 | 501,600 | 95.00 | 82.55 | 1,496.00 | 1,300.00 |
20,442 | 21,790 |
14,856.8 | 13:00 |
LJ-6 | 10-4-59 | 196,000 | 37.12 | 32.26 | 79.40 | 69.00 | 3,600 | 4,510 | 3,075.0 | 5:10 |
LJ-1A | 11-4-59 | 47,520 | 9.00 | 7.82 | 11.50 | 10.00 | 2,040 | 2,965 | 2,021.6 | 8:11 |
LJ-2 | 12-4-59 | 280,000 | 53.03 | 46.08 | 194.40 | 196.00 | 5,720 | 6,550 | 4,465.9 | 11:06 |
LJ-1B | 1-21-60 | 49,104 | 9.30 | 8.08 | 11.70 | 10.20 | 2,040 | 2,965 | 2,021.6 | 8:35 |
Beach abort | 5-9-60 | 2,465 | 0.47 | 0.41 | 0.60 | 0.50 | 475 | 1,431 | 976.2 | 1:16 |
MA-1 | 7-29-60 | 42,768 | 8.10 | 7.04 | 5.59 | 4.85 | 1,560 | 2,495 | 1,701.1 | 3:18 |
LJ-5 | 11-8-60 | 53,328 | 10.10 | 8.78 | 13.60 | 11.80 | 1,690 | 2,618 | 1,785.0 | 2:22 |
MR-1A | 12-19-60 | 690,000 | 130.68 | 113.56 | 234.80 | 204.00 | 6,350 | 7,200 | 4,909.1 | 15:45 |
MR-2 | 1-31-61 | 828,960 | 157.00 | 136.43 | 418.00 | 363.00 | 7,540 | 8,590 | 5,856.8 | 16:39 |
MA-2 | 2-21-61 | 602,140 | 114.04 | 99.10 | 1,431.60 | 1,244.00 | 18,100 | 19,400 | 13,227.3 | 17:56 |
LJ-5A | 3-18-61 | 40,800 | 7.73 | 6.71 | 19.80 | 17.20 | 1,680 | 2,615 | 1,783.0 | 23:48 |
MR-BD | 3-24-61 | 599,280 | 113.50 | 98.63 | 307.40 | 267.10 | 6,560 | 7,514 | 5,123.2 | 8:23 |
MA-3 | 4-25-61 | 23,760 | 4.50 | 3.91 | 0.29 | 0.25 | 1,135 | 1,726 | 1,176.8 | 7:19 |
LJ-5B | 4-28-61 | 14,600 | 2.77 | 2.40 | 9.00 | 7.80 | 1,675 | 2,611 | 1,780.2 | 5:25 |
MR-3 | 5-5-61 | 615,120 | 116.50 | 101.24 | 302.80 | 263.10 | 6,550 | 7,530 | 5,134.1 | 15:22 |
MR-4 | 7-21-61 | 624,400 | 118.26 | 102.76 | 302.10 | 262.50 | 6,618 | 7,580 | 5,168.2 | 15:37 |
MA-4 | 9-13-61 | 750,300 | 142.10 | 123.49 | 26,047.00 | 22,630.00 | 24,389 | 25,705 | 17,526.0 | 1:49:20 |
MA-5 | 11-29-61 | 778,272 | 147.40 | 128.09 |
50,892.00 | 44,104.00 | 24,393 | 25,710 | 17,529.6 | 3:20:59 |
MA-6 | 2-20-62 | 856,279 | 162.17 | 140.92 | 75,679.00 | 65,763.00 | 24,415 | 25,732 | 17,544.1 | 4:55:23 |
MA-7 | 5-24-62 | 880,792 | 166.82 | 144.96 | 76,021.00 | 66,061.00 | 24,422 | 25,738 | 17,548.6 | 4:56:05 |
MA-8 | 10-3-62 | 928,429 | 175.84 | 152.80 | 143,983.00 | 125,118.00 | 24,435 | 25,751 | 17,557.5 | 9:13:11 |
MA-9 | 5-15-63 | 876,174 | 165.9 | 144.2 | 546,167.00 | 474,607.00 | 24,419 | 25,735 | 17,546.6 | 34:19:49 |
Listed range is earth track.
Big Joe = MA Development Flight.
MR-BD = Booster Development Flight.
LJ = Little Joe.
MR = Mercury Redstone.
MA = Mercury Atlas.
Flight duration is lift-off to impact. |
Space-
craft No. | Use | Mission | Delivered to
launch site | Date
launched | Weeks
of prep. | Remarks |
1 | Beach
abort | System qualification test
Escape landing
Postlanding—unmanned |
April 1, 1960 | May 9, 1960 | 5 | No launch vehicle used |
2 | MR-1A | Ballistic
—unmanned | July 23, 1960 | Dec. 19, 1960 | 21 |
Spacecraft reworked after MR-1 launch attempt where launch vehicle
malfunctioned |
3 | LJ-5 | Mercury
max. dynamic pressure abort—unmanned | Sept. 27, 1960 |
Nov. 8, 1960 | 6 | All objectives not accomplished |
4 | MA-1 | Max.
acceleration, max. heat on afterbody—unmanned | May 23, 1960 |
July 29, 1960 | 10 | All systems not complete; all objectives not
accomplished |
5 | MR-2 | Ballistic
—primate | Oct. 11, 1960 | Jan. 31, 1961 | 16 |
Successful mission, Ham occupant |
6 | MA-2 | Max.
acceleration, max. heat on afterbody—unmanned | Sept. 1, 1960 |
Feb. 21, 1961 | 25 | Successful mission |
7 | MR-3 | Ballistic
—manned | Dec. 9, 1960 | May 5, 1961 | 21 | First manned
ballistic mission; mission successful; Shepard, pilot |
8 | MA-3 | Orbital—
unmanned | Nov. 18, 1960 | April 25, 1961 | 23 |
Launched and aborted; all mission objectives not accomplished |
8A | MA-4 | Orbital—
unmanned | May 11, 1961 | Sept. 13, 1961 | 18 |
Spacecraft refitted and flown same configuration; mission successful |
9 | MA-5 | Orbital—
primate | Feb. 24, 1961 | Nov. 29, 1961 | 40 |
Mission changed after delivery; 2 orbits flown successfully; Enos
occupant |
10 | Ground
test | Orbital flight
Environmental test |
Mar. 31, 1961 | *June 1,
1962 | | Used at St. Louis in project orbit |
11 | MR-4 | Ballistic
—manned | Mar. 7, 1961 | July 21, 1961 | 19 |
Manned ballistic mission; flown successfully; spacecraft lost on
recovery; Grissom, pilot |
12B | Unas-
signed | Orbital—
manned
1-day mission | | | | Mission
canceled, spacecraft not delivered |
13 | MA-6 | Orbital—
manned | Aug. 27, 1961 | Feb. 20, 1962 | 25 |
Unusually long pad period, 4 holds; first manned orbital mission;
mission successful; Glenn, pilot |
14 | LJ-5A | Mercury
max. dynamic pressure abort—unmanned | Jan. 20, 1961 |
Mar. 18, 1961 | 8 | All mission objectives not accomplished |
14A | LJ-5B | Mercury
max. dynamic pressure abort—unmanned | April 4, 1961 |
April 28, 1961 | 3.5 | Spacecraft refitted and flown same
configuration; mission successful |
15B | MA-10 | Orbital—
manned
1-day mission | Nov.
16, 1962 | | |
Mission canceled after success of MA-9, spacecraft 20 |
16 | MA-8 | Orbital—
manned | Jan. 16, 1962 | Oct. 3, 1962 | 37 |
Mission changed from 3 to 6 orbital manned; mission successful; Schirra,
pilot |
17 | Unas-
signed | Orbital—
manned
1-day mission | April
18, 1963 | | |
Delivered to Cape for parts support of manned 1-day missions |
18 | MA-7 | Orbital—
manned | Nov. 15, 1961 | May 24, 1962 | 27 |
4 holds in pad period, 2nd 3 orbital mission; successful; Carpenter,
pilot |
19 | Unas-
signed | Orbital—
manned | Mar. 20, 1962 | | | Mission
canceled after MA-8 |
20 | MA-9 | Orbital—
manned
1-day mission | Oct. 9,
1962 | May 15, 1963 | 31 |
22 orbital manned mission; mission successful; Cooper, pilot |
SCHEDULE I
[Total Program, Obligations, and Expenditure by
Fiscal Year as of January 31, 1963]
Fiscal Year 1959 |
Function |
Program | Obligation | Expenditure |
Tracking and data aquisition, integrated system,
study and test | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Tracking and data aquisition, network operations | 0 |
0 | 0 |
Spacecraft |
16,768,469.98 | 16,768,650.95 | 16,768,650.95 |
Scout | 3,932,000.00 | 3,932,000.00 |
3,932,000.00 |
Atlas |
10,465,465.08 | 10,436,256.05 | 10,435,404.25 |
Little Joe |
2,546,307.43 | 2,546,307.43 | 2,546,307.43 |
Redstone |
8,967,182.00 | 8,967,182.00 | 8,967,182.00 |
Jupiter |
1,779,153.97 | 1,779,153.97 | 1,779,153.97 |
Big Joe | 437,211.87 | 437,211.87 |
437,211.87 |
Spacecraft support tech. |
1,425,736.29 | 1,425,736.29 | 1,425,421.89 |
Flight operations |
0 | 0 |
0 |
Recovery operations |
0 | 0 |
0 |
Network operations |
0 | 0 |
0 |
Network implementation |
0 | 0 |
0 |
General administrative expense |
34,462.59 | 34,462.59 | 34,462.59 |
Program overhead |
115,374.75 | 115,374.75 | 115,374.75 |
Fiscal Year 1960 |
Function |
Program | Obligation | Expenditure |
Tracking and data aquisition, integrated system,
study and test | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Tracking and data aquisition, network operations | 65,784.75 |
65,784.75 | 65,784.75 |
Spacecraft |
64,167,647.42 | 64,167,647.42 | 64,167,647.42 |
Scout | 0 | 0 |
0 |
Atlas |
11,496,686.97 | 11,496,686.97 | 11,496,680.97 |
Little Joe |
10,865.38 | 10,865.38 | 10,865.38 |
Redstone |
2,567,000.00 | 2,567,000.00 | 1,983,163.47 |
Jupiter | 0 | 0 |
0 |
Big Joe | 14,427.06 | 14,427.06 |
14,427.06 |
Spacecraft support tech. |
2,490,090.81 | 2,488,421.01 | 2,485,117.33 |
Flight operations |
0 | 0 |
0 |
Recovery operations |
0 | 0 |
0 |
Network operations |
0 | 0 |
0 |
Network implementation |
0 | 0 |
0 |
General administrative expense |
90,711.68 | 90,711.68 | 96,701.34 |
Program overhead |
303,686.91 | 303,686.91 | 296,620.72 |
Fiscal Year 1961 |
Function |
Program | Obligation | Expenditure |
Tracking and data aquisition, integrated system,
study and test | 400,000.00 | 400,000.00 | 400,000.00 |
Tracking and data aquisition, network operations | 28,980.59 |
28,980.59 | 28,980.59 |
Spacecraft |
55,718,834.77 | 54,755,159.29 | 43,359,310.50 |
Scout | 0 | 0 |
0 |
Atlas |
24,586,996.72 | 24,586,996.72 | 23,967,037.03 |
Little Joe |
29,974.61 | 29,974.61 | 29,974.61 |
Redstone |
2,241,553.22 | 2,239,553.22 | 2,092,583.89 |
Jupiter | 0 | 0 |
0 |
Big Joe | 0 | 0 |
0 |
Spacecraft support tech. |
2,223,312.41 | 2,033,312.41 | 2,033,273.75 |
Flight operations |
0 | 0 |
0 |
Recovery operations |
2,621,496.73 | 2,621,496.73 | 2,429,675.70 |
Network operations |
8,625,721.12 | 8,625,721.12 | 8,601,828.69 |
Network implementation |
12,769,198.30 | 12,769,198.30 | 12,534,358.04 |
General administrative expense |
355,825.71 | 355,825.71 | 428,247.47 |
Program overhead |
1,191,242.61 | 1,191,242.61 | 1,095,561.44 |
Fiscal Year 1962 |
Function |
Program | Obligation | Expenditure |
Tracking and data aquisition, integrated system,
study and test | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Tracking and data aquisition, network operations | 0 |
0 | 0 |
Spacecraft |
1,435,338.89 | 1,238,708.29 | 831,673.28 |
Scout | 0 | 0 |
0 |
Atlas | 5,540,000.00 | 5,540,000.00 |
5,540,000.00 |
Little Joe | 0 | 0 |
0 |
Redstone | 0 | 0 |
0 |
Jupiter | 0 | 0 |
0 |
Big Joe | 0 | 0 |
0 |
Spacecraft support tech. |
890,659.25 | 890,659.25 | 335,216.58 |
Flight operations |
1,316,784.83 | 1,245,376.32 | 1,141,132.23 |
Recovery operations |
6,312,134.32 | 5,851,827.00 | 5,832,311.71 |
Network operations |
0 | 0 |
0 |
Network implementation |
0 | 0 |
0 |
General administrative expense* | 5,874,793.40 | 5,814,037.00 | 5,450,211.30 |
Program overhead* |
2,429,177.62 | 2,232,327.91 | 1,872,758.60 |
Fiscal Year 1963 |
Function |
Program | Obligation | Expenditure |
Spacecraft |
185,000.00 | 18,384.05 | 1.05 |
Support development |
75,000.00 | 71,323.42 | 29,174.09 |
Operations: |
3,082,000.00 | |
|
Flight | | 532,395.27 |
77,384.85 |
Recovery | | 2,531,421.92 |
269,456.64 |
*Computed using a percentage of 86
which was the percent of program overhead applied directly to Project
Mercury as of June 30, 1962. |
SCHEDULE II
[Total Program, Obligations, and Expenditure by
Fiscal Year as of January 31, 1963]
Fiscal Year 1959 |
Function |
Program | Obligation | Expenditure |
Salaries and expenses |
1,332,170.95 | 1,332,170.95 | 1,332,170.95 |
Fiscal Year 1960 |
Function |
Program | Obligation | Expenditure |
Salaries and expenses |
5,000,648.87 | 5,000,648.87 | 5,000,648.87 |
Fiscal Year 1961 |
Function |
Program | Obligation | Expenditure |
Salaries and expenses |
7,747,483.15 | 7,747,703.30 | 7,747,703.30 |
Fiscal Year 1962 |
Function |
Program | Obligation | Expenditure |
Salaries and expenses* |
1,332,170.95 | 1,332,170.95 | 1,332,170.95 |
*Based on a percentage of 62 which was
the percent of program overhead applied to Project Mercury from this
appropriation as of June 30, 1962. |
SCHEDULE III
[Total Program, Obligations, and Expenditure by
Fiscal Year as of January 31, 1963]
Fiscal Year 1960 |
Function |
Program | Obligation | Expenditure |
Equipment and instrumentation |
500,000.00 | 499,700.00 | 499,700.00 |
[July 1963]
Spacecraft No. 1—beach abort
and sled test (present status—display at MSC Public Affairs Office) |
| August
9-18, 1963— | Springfield,
Illinois
Illinois State Fair |
|
September 9-14, 1963— |
Abilene, Texas
West Texas State Fair |
|
October 3-4, 1963— |
Memphis, Tennessee
Education Workshop |
|
November 1963— | Available
for exhibit scheduling or release to the U.S. Air Force Museum,
Washington, D.C. |
Spacecraft No. 2—MR-1
ballistic, unmanned and RCS test bed (present status—display at MSC
Public Affairs Office) |
| August
1-5, 1963— | Kansas City,
Missouri
U.S. Air Force Industrial Propulsion
Richards-Gebaur Air Force Base, Missouri |
| August
17-18, 1963— | Kalamazoo,
Michigan
Air Show |
| August
20-24, 1963— | Champaign,
Illinois
National Aero Scout Conference
University of Illinois |
| August
31- September 3, 1963— |
Dallas, Texas
Dallas Civil Air Patrol |
|
September 16-21, 1963— |
Texarkana, Texas
Four State Fair and Rodeo |
|
October 5-10, 1963— |
Houston, Texas
International Association of Chiefs of Police |
|
October 15, 1963— |
Available for exhibit scheduling or release to Goddard Museum, New
Mexico |
Spacecraft No. 3—Little Joe 5
(lost on launch) |
Spacecraft No. 4—MA-1
ballistic, unmanned (lost on launch) |
Spacecraft No. 5—
MR-2 ballistic, primate and net couch qualification (present status—
MSC-Hanger 135—being refurbished after couch program) |
|
September 1963— | Release
to Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, Alabama, for display |
Spacecraft No. 6—MA-2
ballistic, unmanned (present status—permanent item at Houston, Texas,
World Trade Center) |
Spacecraft No. 7—MR-3
ballistic, manned (Shepard) (present status—display at Smithsonian
Institution) |
Spacecraft No. 8—MA-3, MA-4
orbital, unmanned (present status—storage at MSC) |
|
October 5-20, 1963— |
Dallas, Texas
Texas State Fair |
|
October 28-30, 1963— |
Chicago, Illinois
National Electronics Conference |
|
November 1963- July
1964— | Houston and
Texas special school tour |
|
September 10-14, 1964— |
Abilene, Texas
West Texas State Fair |
|
September 17-22, 1964— |
Waco, Texas
Heart of Texas Fair |
Spacecraft No. 9—MA-5 orbital,
primate and project orbit (present status—testing at MSC); available
for display upon completion of testing |
Spacecraft No. 10—Project
orbit and RDtest bed (not flown) (present status—testing at MSC);
available for display upon completion of testing |
Spacecraft No. 11—MR-4
ballistic, manned (Grissom) (lost on recovery) |
Spacecraft No. 12—MA-6 backup
and manned 1-day mission (present status—storage at MSC); available
for exhibit scheduling by NASA Headquarters |
Spacecraft No. 13—MA-6
orbital, manned (Glenn) (present status—display at Smithsonian
Institute) |
Spacecraft No. 14—Little Joe
5B maximum dynamic pressure abort and parachute qualification tests
(present status—storage at MSC); release to Langley Research Center |
Spacecraft No. 15—Manned 1-day
mission (not flown) (present status—storage at Cape Canaveral);
available for exhibit scheduling by NASA Headquarters |
Spacecraft No. 16—MA-8
orbital, manned (Schirra) (present status—United States Information
Agency tour of France) |
|
August- September 1963— |
Athens, Greece
World Scout Jamboree
Foreign Tour |
|
October 1963— | Orlando,
Florida
Space Science Achievements |
|
November 1963— | Amsterdam,
Holland
Amsterdam Exposition |
|
December 1963- April
1964— | World Tour |
| May
1964— | Boston,
Massachusetts
Peaceful Uses of Space Conference |
Spacecraft No. 17—Manned 1-day
mission (not flown) (present status—storage at MSC); available for
exhibit scheduling by NASA Headquarters |
Spacecraft No. 18—MA-7
orbital, manned (Carpenter) (present status—display at NASA
Headquarters) |
| August
10-14, 1963— | Houston,
Texas
American Municipal Association |
| August
21-24, 1963— | Boulder,
Colorado |
|
September 20-29, 1963— |
Houston, Texas
Houston International Trade and Travel Fair |
|
October 23- November 2,
1963— | Jacksonville,
Florida
Agriculture and Industrial Fair |
|
November 21-23, 1963— |
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Aerospace Education Workshop |
|
December 1963- April
1964— | Available for
exhibit scheduling by NASA Headquarters |
| May
1964— | International
Science Fair (location unknown at this time) |
| June
1964- June 1965— | United
States Tour |
| July
1965— | Release to Cape
Canaveral |
Spacecraft No. 19—MA-8 backup
(not flown) (present status—storage at MSC); available for display |
Spacecraft No. 20—MA-9
orbital, manned (Cooper) (present status—display at NASA
Headquarters) |
|
September 21-29, 1963— |
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Oklahoma State Fair |
|
September 30- October 2,
1963— | Houston, Texas
Mercury Report Conference |
|
October 3, 1963— |
Available for 50-State capitol tour |
Big Joe Boilerplate—Big Joe
ballistic unmanned (present status—display at MSC-PAO) |
|
October 1-5, 1963— | Waco,
Texas
Heart of Texas Fair |
|
October 10, 1963- June
1965— | Retained by MSC
for Houston and Texas exhibits |
SUGGESTED FINAL DISPOSITION OF
MANNED MERCURY SPACECRAFT |
Spacecraft No. 16—MA-8—
orbital, manned (Schirra); after July 1965—Undetermined |
Spacecraft No. 18—MA-7—
orbital, manned (Carpenter); after July 1965—Cape Canaveral |
Spacecraft No. 20—MA-9—
orbital, manned (Cooper); after July 1965—Houston, Texas, for
permanent installation at MSC |
SUGGESTED FINAL DISPOSITION OF
UNMANNED MERCURY SPACECRAFT |
Spacecraft No. 1or No. 2
—after January 1964—Goddard Museum in New Mexico |
Spacecraft No. 1or No. 2
—after January 1964—U.S. Air Force Museum, Washington, D.C. |
Spacecraft No. 5—MR-2—
ballistic, primate and net couch qualification—immediate release to
Marshall Space Flight Center |
Spacecraft No. 14—Little Joe
5B maximum dynamic pressure and parachute qualification tests—
immediate release to Langley Research Center |
Launch vehicle |
Delivery date | Mission | Comments |
Redstone |
1 | August 3, 1960 | MR-1 | Failed on
pad |
2 | December 20, 1960 | MR-2 | |
3 | December 3, 1960 | MR-1A | Replaced
launch vehicle No. 1 |
5 | March 7, 1961 | MRBD | Booster
Development Flight |
7 | March 30, 1961 | MR-3 | |
8 | June 12, 1961 | MR-4 | |
4 | | | Not used |
6 | | | Not used |
Atlas |
50-D | June 18, 1960 | MA-1 | |
67-D | September 20,
1960 | MA-2 |
|
100-D | March 14, 1961 | MA-3 | |
88-D | July 15, 1961 | MA-4 | |
93-D | October 9, 1961 | MA-5 | |
109-D | November 30,
1961 | MA-6 |
|
107-D | March 6, 1962 | MA-7 | |
113-D | August 8, 1962 | MA-8 | |
20-D | | | Assigned to NASA Hq. |
10-D | | Big Joe | |
130-D | March 18, 1963 | MA-9 | |
144-D | | MA-10 | Canceled |
152-D | | | In storage—unassigned |
77-D | | | Canceled |
103-D | | | Canceled |
167-D | | | Canceled |
| | |
January 26, 1959: Space Task
Group |
| Project
Manager—Robert R. Gilruth |
|
Assistant Project Manager—Charles J. Donlan
Special Assistant to Project Manager—Paul E. Purser
Technical Services Assistant to Project Manager—Jack A. Kinzler
Administrative Assistant and Head of Staff Services—Paul D. Taylor
Chief of Flight Systems Division—Maxime A. Faget
Chief of Operations Division—Charles W. Mathews
Chief of Engineering and Contract Administration Division—Charles
H. Zimmerman
Services Representatives—Lt. Colonel Keith Lindell, U.S. Air
Force; Lt. Colonel Martin Raines, U.S. Army; and Commander Paul
Havenstein, U.S. Navy
Aero Medical Consultants—Dr. Stanley White, U.S. Air Force; Dr.
William Augerson, U.S. Army; and Dr. Robert Voas, U.S. Navy |
| |
February 16, 1959: |
| McDonnell Aircraft
Corporation Liaison Officer and Test Program Coordinator to STG—
Frank G. Morgan |
| | |
June 19, 1959: |
| Capsule
Coordination Office: |
| Group
1—Loads, thermodynamics, structures, and aerodynamics
Group 2—Cabin, life support, and controls
Group 3—Electronics, recovery, and sequencing
Group 4—Mechanical handling and transport equipment; schedules;
hardware testing, spares, and standards and specifications |
| | |
| | | |
|
August 3, 1959: Space Task
Group |
| Director of
Project Mercury—Robert R. Gilruth |
|
Assistant Director of Project Mercury—Charles J. Donlan
Staff Assistants: |
| Special Assistant
—Paul E. Purser
Technical Assistant—James A. Chamberlin
Executive Assistant—Raymond L. Zavasky
U.S. Air Force—Colonel Keith Lindell
U.S. Army—Lt. Colonel Martin Raines
U.S. Navy—Commander Paul Havenstein
Langley Research Center—Kemble Johnson
Public Affairs Officer—Lt. Colonel John A. Powers
Staff Services: |
| Personnel
Assistant—Burney H. Goodwin
Administrative Services—Guy W. Boswick, Jr. |
| Technical Services
—Jack A. Kinzler
Astronaut and Training Group—Colonel Keith Lindell
Flight Systems Division—Maxime A. Faget |
| Computing Group—
Katherine S. Stokes
Systems Test Branch—William M. Bland, Jr.
Performance Branch—Aleck C. Bond |
| Aerodynamics
Section—Alan B. Kehlet
Loads Section—George A. Watts
Heat Transfer Section—Leonard Rabb |
| Dynamics Branch—
Robert G. Chilton |
| Flight Control
Section—Richard R. Carley
Space Mechanics Section—Robert G. Chilton (Acting) |
| Life Systems
Branch—Dr. Stanley C. White
On-Board Systems Branch—H. H. Ricker, Jr. |
| Electrical Systems
Section—H. H. Ricker, Jr.
Mechanical Systems Section—J. B. Lee |
| Operations
Division—Charles W. Mathews |
| Assistant Chief
for Implementation—G. Merritt Preston
Assistant Chief for Plans and Arrangements—Christopher C. Kraft,
Jr.
Assistant to Division Chief—John D. Hodge |
| Mission Analysis
Branch—John P. Mayer |
| Trajectory
Analysis Section—John P. Mayer (Acting)
Operational Analysis Section—Jack Coehn (Acting)
Mathematical Analysis Section—Stanley H. Cohn |
| Flight Control
Branch—Gerald W. Brewer |
| Control Central
and Flight Safety Section—Gerald W. Brewer (Acting)
Training Aids Section—Harold I. Johnson |
| Launch Operations
Branch—Charles W. Mathews (Acting) |
| AMR Project Office
—Elmer H. Buller
Preflight Checkout Section—G. Merritt Preston (Acting) |
| Recovery
Operations Branch—Robert F. Thompson |
| Engineering and
Contract Administration Division—James A. Chamberlin (Acting) |
| Field
Representative at McDonnell—Wilbur H. Gray
Capsule Coordination Office—James A. Chamberlin
Contracts and Scheduling Branch—George F. McDougall, Jr.
Engineering Branch—Caldwell Johnson |
| | |
August 10, 1959 (Changes): |
| Operations
Division: |
| AMR
Project Office—deleted from Launch Operations Branch and placed
directly under division head
Preflight Checkout Section—deleted from Launch Operations Branch |
| | |
September 15, 1959: |
| Office of the
Director: |
|
Associate Director (Operations)—established. Walter C. Williams
appointed to position. Charles J. Donlan became Associate Director
(Development) |
| | |
|
November 16, 1959 (Changes): |
| Engineering and
Contract Administration Division: |
|
Contracts and Scheduling Branch: |
| Contracts Section—Joseph V.
Piland (Acting)
Scheduling Section—Nicholas Jevas |
| |
November 23, 1959 (Changes): |
| Staff Services—abolished
Administrative Services Office—established under Director—no
change in personnel
Personnel Office—established under Director—no change in
personnel
Procurement and Supply Office—Glenn F. Bailey
Budget and Finance Office—John P. Donovan |
| |
January 11, 1960 (Changes): |
| Engineering and Contract
Administration Division—redesignated as Engineering Division—James
A. Chamberlin, Acting Chief, was appointed as Chief and relieved of
duties as Technical Assistant to Director
Technical Assistant—Kenneth S. Kleinknecht appointed to Director's
staff
Staff Assistant—Martin C. Byrnes, Jr. appointed to Director's
staff |
| |
January 18, 1960: |
| Mercury-Atlas Flight Test
Working Group—B. Porter Brown (Chairman) |
| | |
February 12, 1960 (Operational
Organization and Appointments): |
| Operations
Director—Walter C. Williams |
|
Flight Director—Christopher C. Kraft, Jr.
Chief Flight Surgeon—Dr. Stanley C. White
Launch Operations Manager—G. Merritt Preston
Capsule Operations Manager—Scott H. Simpkinson |
|
|
(Note: These appointments did not affect the status of individuals in
the formal organization) |
| | |
February 16, 1960: |
| Digital Computer
Group—established under Director—Stanley H. Cohn appointed Head and
relieved of duties as Head of Mathematical Analysis Section
Operations Division—Mission Analysis Branch: |
| Mathematical
Analysis Section—John P. Mayer (Acting) |
| | |
May 12, 1960: |
| NASA Resident
Representative at McDonnell Aircraft—position was formally organized
under the Engineering and Contract Administration Division and
designated Field Representative at McDonnell. The position was now
placed under the Director, and there was no change in personnel |
|
Resident Systems Test Engineer—T. M. Edwards
Resident Inspection Engineer—J. C. Moser
Inspectors—subsequently assigned |
| |
May 25, 1960: |
| Advanced Vehicle Team—
Robert O. Piland |
|
| (Note: Individuals appointed
were charged with preliminary design studies leading to establishment
of requirements for an advanced multi-man space vehicle. Team
membership did not affect status of individuals in formal organization) |
| | |
|
September 1, 1960: |
| Security Office—
Donald D. Blume—activity established under Director
Flight Systems Division: |
|
Systems Test Branch—redesignated Project Engineering Branch and
transferred to the Engineering Division |
| Engineering Division: |
|
Project Engineering Branch—William M. Bland, Jr., also appointed
Assistant Chief of Division |
| Flight Systems
Division (Reorganization—changes only): |
|
Assistant Chief for Mercury Support—Aleck C. Bond
Apollo Projects Office—Robert O. Piland
Systems Test Branch—deleted
Electrical Systems Branch—formerly a section under On-Board
Systems Branch: |
| Communications
Systems Section—Ralph S. Sawyer
Instrumentation Systems Section—Alfred Eickmeier |
|
Flight Dynamics Branch—formerly Dynamics Branch: |
| Flight Control
Branch—Thomas V. Chambers
Dynamics Analysis Section—Richard R. Carley
Aerodynamics Section—Bruce G. Jackson |
|
| (Note: Flight
Control Section and Space Mechanics Section maintained status quo) |
| Life
Systems Branch—Dr. Stanley C. White |
| Aerospace Medical
Section—James P. Henry
Crew Equipment Section—Richard S. Johnson (Acting) |
|
Systems Engineering Branch—Caldwell Johnson: |
| Systems
Integration Branch—Owen E. Maynard
Equipment Engineering Section—Richard F. Smith
Mechanical Systems Section—Richard B. Ferguson |
|
Structures Branch—Robert E. Vale: |
| Structural
Analysis Section—Robert E. Vale (Acting)
Loads Section—George A. Watts
Heat Transfer Section—Kenneth C. Weston |
|
On-Board Systems Branch—abolished |
| | |
December 8, 1960: |
| Office of NASA—
Space Task Group Field Representative at McDonnell Aircraft Corporation
—(Reorganization—no change in personnel) |
|
Capsule Systems Test Coordinator—Thomas M. Edwards
Capsule Systems Test Engineers—Phillip M. Deans, Archibald E.
Morse, and Louis Leopold
Coordination—Harle L. Vogel
Inspectors—Albert J. Eaton (lead)
Test and Schedules—William J. Nesbitt
Consultant—Scott H. Simpkinson |
| | |
December 9, 1960: |
| Flight Systems
Division: |
| Life Systems
Branch—Redesignated Life Systems Group and transferred to Office of
the Director. The Aerospace Medical Section and Crew Equipment Section
remained under the Group, and there was no change in personnel |
| | |
January 16, 1961: |
| Flight Systems
Division—Flight Dynamics Branch: |
| Dynamic Analysis
Section—Redesignated as the Navigation and Guidance Section
Flight Control Section—Redesignated as the Attitude Control
Section |
| | |
March 21, 1961: |
| Operations
Division—Launch Operations Branch: |
|
Established as the Preflight Operations Division with G. Merritt Preston
as Chief
Flight Operations Division—Established from the remaining elements
of the Operations Division, with the exception of the Mercury-Atlantic
Missile Range Projects Office. Charles W. Mathews was appointed
Division Chief
Mercury-Atlantic Missile Range Projects Office—Designated a staff
function of the Director's office. No change in personnel
Life Systems Group—Accorded division status as the Life Systems
Division. No change in personnel
Reliability and Flight Safety Office—Established as a staff
function of the Director's office. Frederick J. Bailey was appointed
office head
Business Management Office—Designated on organization chart with
the following sub-offices: Procurement and Supply Office; Personnel
Office; Budget and Finance Office; Administrative Services Office; and
Security Office. No personnel assignment was indicated for the Chief of
the Business Management Office |
| | |
April 1, 1961: |
| Office of the
Director: |
|
Associate Director NASA—Space Task Group—Walter C. Williams. Charles
J. Donlan joined the staff of the Langley Research Center in the
position of Associate Director as of this date |
| |
April 13, 1961: |
| Business Management Office—
Designation changed to Office of Assistant Director for Administration
with Wesley L. Hjornevik as Assistant Director |
| | |
June 5, 1961: |
| Flight System
Division: |
|
Flight Vehicles Integration Branch—Established with Maxime A. Faget,
the Division Chief, serving as Acting Head |
| |
June 8, 1961: |
| Facilities Planning Panel—
Established to identify and coordinate design requirements for the
permanent facilities of the Manned Spacecraft Center. Raymond L.
Zavasky was appointed Chairman |
| |
July 10, 1961: |
| Architect-Engineer Selection
Board—Established to review the qualifications of an adequate number
of architect-engineer firms when procurement by contract of
architect-engineer services for a particular project was contemplated.
I. E. Campagna was appointed Chairman |
| |
July 31, 1961: |
| Office of Assistant Director
for Administration—Management Services Office—Established with
Philip H. Whitbeck appointed as Chief
Personnel Office—Stuart H. Clark |
| |
August 24, 1961: |
| Manager of Space Task Group
Cape Operations—G. Merritt Preston, with exception of periods when
Walter C. Williams is present. Assignment was in addition to Preston's
duties as Chief, Preflight Operations Division |
| | |
September 6, 1961: |
| Office of
Assistant Director for Administration—Management Services Office: |
|
Management Analysis Office—Established with Charles F. Bingman
appointed as Head (Acting) |
| | |
September 19, 1961: |
| Office of
Assistant Director for Administration—Management Services Office: |
|
Transportation Office—Established with Edward Johnson designated as
Chief |
| | |
September 29, 1961: |
| Office of
Assistant Director for Administration—Management Services Office: |
|
Supply Office—Established with Thomas J. Porter designated as Chief
(Acting) |
| | |
October 2, 1961: |
| Engineering
Division: |
|
Engineering Data Office—Established with Robert E. McKann designated
Office Head |
| |
November 1, 1961: |
| Space Task Group—
Redesignated Manned Spacecraft Center |
| |
January 15, 1962: |
| Mercury Project Office—
Established with Kenneth S. Kleinknecht appointed as Manager.
Organization and staff were subsequently announced
Apollo Spacecraft Project Office—Established with Charles W. Frick
as Manager |
| |
January 15, 1962: |
| Gemini Spacecraft Project
Office—Established with James A. Chamberlin appointed as Manager |
| | |
January 15, 1962: |
| Flight Systems
Division—Abolished
Office of Assistant Director for Research and Development—Maxime
A. Faget |
|
Spacecraft Research Division—Charles W. Mathews
Life Systems Division—Dr. Stanley C. White
Systems Evaluation and Development Division—Aleck C. Bond
Space Physics Division—Not organized |
| |
January 31, 1962: |
| Engineering Division—
Abolished. Workload divided among Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo Project
Offices |
| | |
January 31, 1962: |
| Mercury Project
Office—Organized and manned:
Office of Project Manager: |
|
Deputy Project Manager—William M. Bland, Jr.
Project Engineering Office—Edison M. Fields
Project Engineering Field Office (Cape)—A. E. Morse, Jr.
Engineering Operations Office—Joseph V. Piland (Acting)
Engineering Data and Measurements Office—Robert E. McKann |
| |
February 26, 1962: |
| Office of Assistant Director
for Operations—Flight Crew Operations Division—Established with
Warren J. North appointed as Chief |
| | |
| |
May 21, 1962: |
| Office of
Assistant Director for Operations: |
|
Flight Operations Division—Reorganization. Christopher C. Kraft, Jr.
remained Chief
Technical Assistants—Sigurd A. Sjoberg and Robert D. Harrington
Executive Assistant—Chris C. Critzos
Assistant Chief for Flight Control—John D. Hodge |
|
Flight Control Operations Branch—John D. Hodge (Acting) |
| Flight Operations
Section—Eugene F. Kranz (Acting)
Systems Analysis Section—Arnold D. Aldrich
Training and Simulation Section—Robert E. Ernull |
|
Operational Facilities Branch—Howard C. Kyle |
| RF Systems
Section—James K. Meson
Information Flow Section—Dennis E. Fielder
Network Requirements Section—Thomas Stuart |
|
Mission Control Center Branch—Tecwyn Roberts |
| Control Center
Design Section—Richard A. Hoover
Mission Logic and Computer Hardware Section—Glynn S. Lunney
Simulation Design Section—Harold G. Miller |
| Data
Coordination Branch—Richard G. Arbic |
|
Assistant Chief for Mission Planning—John P. Mayer |
| Real
Time Program Development Branch—Lynwood C. Dunseith |
| Gemini Program
Development Section—La Rue W. Burbank
Apollo Program Development Section—Unassigned |
|
Operations Analysis Branch—Carl R. Huss |
| Prelaunch Mission
Analysis Section—Charlie C. Allen
Postflight Trajectory Analysis Section—Donald J. Incerto
Performance and Guidance Section—Marlowe D. Cassetti |
|
Mathematical Physics Branch—Edward A. Knobelauch |
| Mathematical
Support Section—Paul G. Brumberg
Computer Operation and Programing Section—I. Edna Hawkins
Advanced Mission Analysis Section—Unassigned |
|
Mission Analysis Branch—Morris V. Jenkins |
| Lunar Trajectory
Section—Harold D. Beck
Reentry Studies Section—John R. Gurley, Jr. |
|
Rendezvous Analysis Branch—James F. Dalby (Acting) |
| Earth Rendezvous
Section—John E. Gerstle, Jr.
Lunar Rendezvous Section—Unassigned |
|
Assistant Chief for Operational Support—Robert F. Thompson |
|
Recovery Branch—Robert F. Thompson (Acting) |
| Current
Operations Section—John B. Graham, Jr.
Advanced Planning Section—William C. Hayes, Jr. |
|
Operational Evaluation and Test Branch—Peter J. Armitage |
| Systems
Suitability Section—Peter J. Armitage (Acting)
Test and Development Section—Milton L. Windler |
| | |
|
June 15, 1962: |
| Office of
Reliability and Flight Safety—Frederick J. Bailey |
|
Design Evaluation Staff: |
| Communications
and Telemetry—Lawrence Steinhardt
Electrical and Power Supply—Lawrence Steinhardt (Acting)
Instrumentation—Lawrence Steinhardt (Acting)
Navigation and Guidance—George S. Shigekawa (Acting)
Pyrotechnics—George S. Shigekawa (Acting)
Environmental Control System—John C. French (Acting)
Propulsion—John W. Conlon (Acting)
Human Factors—Thomas J. Edwards (Acting)
Structure and Ablation Shield—John C. French (Acting)
Landing Systems—John C. French (Acting)
Separation Devices—George S. Shigekawa (Acting)
Electrical Sequential Systems—Thomas J. Edwards (Acting)
Analytical Methods—Thomas J. Edwards
Quality Assurance—Karl P. Sperber |
|
Operations Evaluation Staff: |
| Mechanical and
Interface—Norbert B. Vaughn
Electrical and Power Supply—Norbert B. Vaughn (Acting)
Propulsion and Pyrotechnics—John W. Conlon
Flight and Checkout Procedures—Frederick J. Bailey (Acting) |
|
Project Reliability Evaluation Staff: |
| Mercury
Reliability Advisor—Charles Rice
Gemini Reliability Advisor—Lemeul Menear
Apollo Reliability Advisor—George S. Shigekawa |
| |
June 25, 1962: |
| Office of Assistant Director
for Operations—Aerospace Medical Operations Office—Established with
Dr. Charles A. Berry appointed as Chief |
| |
September 18, 1962: |
| Coordinator of Astronaut
Affairs—Astronaut Donald K. Slayton |
| |
October 29, 1962: |
| Assistant Director for
Information and Control Systems—G. Barry Graves |
Research and development of Project
Mercury was literally a national effort, especially when considering
the number of contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers involved in
the program. McDonnell, as a prime contractor for the spacecraft, was
assisted by an estimated 4,000 suppliers and subcontractors throughout
the country. Also of significant importance was the industrial effort
put forth in the manufacture of launch vehicles and ground support
equipment, and the construction of the worldwide tracking network in
support of Project Mercury. Quite probably, if all were combined, the
total figure would reach 10,000. Obviously, a complete listing is
beyond the scope or intent of this work, but herein is a cross section
of contributory effort covering the major systems and components. |
| |
McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, St.
Louis, Missouri— |
| Prime contractor for the Mercury
spacecraft. |
Convair Astronautics Division (GD/A),
San Diego, California— |
| Prime contractor for the Atlas launch
vehicle system used for the manned orbital phase of Project Mercury.
Procured through Space Systems Division of Air Force Systems Command. |
Chrysler Corporation Missile Division,
Detroit, Michigan— |
| Prime contractor for the Redstone launch
vehicle system used in the manned suborbital phase of Project Mercury.
Procured through Army Missile Command. |
North American Aviation, Inc., El
Segundo, California— |
| Contractor for the Little Joe launch
vehicle airframe used in aerodynamic and abort technique testing
program phase of Project Mercury. |
Ventura Division (formerly Radioplane) of the
Northrop Corporation, Van Nuys, California— |
| Contractor for the Mercury spacecraft
landing and recovery system. |
B. F. Goodrich Company, Akron, Ohio— |
| Contractor for the Mercury spacecraft
astronaut pressure suit. |
Western Electric Company, New York
City, New York— |
| Prime contractor for the Mercury worldwide
tracking network. |
Minneapolis-Honeywell Regulator Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota— |
| Stabilization system for the Mercury
spacecraft. |
Bell Aerospace Corporation, Buffalo,
New York— |
| Reaction control system for the Mercury
spacecraft. |
AiResearch Manufacturing Division of the
Garrett Corporation, Los Angeles, California— |
| Environmental control system for the
Mercury spacecraft. |
The Perkin-Elmer Corporation, Norwalk,
Connecticut— |
| Periscope for the Mercury spacecraft. |
Eagle-Picher Company, Joplin, Missouri
— |
| Batteries for the Mercury spacecraft. |
Barnes Engineering Company, Stamford,
Connecticut— |
| Horizon scanner for the Mercury
spacecraft. |
Wheaton Engineering Corporation,
Wheaton, Illinois— |
| Time-delay relays and programer for
Mercury spacecraft. |
Donner Scientific Company, Concord,
California— |
| Maximum altitude sensor and thrust cutoff
sensor. |
Atlantic Research Corporation,
Alexandria, Virginia— |
| Escape tower jettison rocket and posigrade
rocket for the Mercury spacecraft. |
Thiokol Chemical Corporation, Elkton,
Maryland— |
| Retrograde rocket for Mercury spacecraft. |
Lockheed Propulsion Company, Redlands,
California— |
| Rocket motor for the Mercury spacecraft
escape tower. (The original contract for this component was signed with
the Grand Central Rocket Company, Redlands, California, which was later
purchased by Lockheed.) |
Cincinnati Testing and Research Laboratory of
the Studebaker-Packard Corporation, Cincinnati, Ohio— |
| Heat shield for the Mercury spacecraft. |
Walter Kidde Company, Belleville, New
Jersey— |
| Emergency flotation bag for the Mercury
spaceccraft. |
Aeronca Corporation, Middletown, Ohio
— |
| Honeycomb panels for the Mercury
spacecraft impact landing support. |
Collins Radio Corporation, Cedar
Rapids, Iowa— |
| HF and UHF voice communications and UHF
recovery antenna, onboard communications for the Mercury spacecraft. |
Motorola, Incorporated, Franklin Park,
Illinois— |
| Command receivers, onboard communications
for Mercury spacecraft. |
Texas Instruments, Incorporated,
Dallas, Texas— |
| Onboard telemetry communications for
Mercury spacecraft. |
Cooper Electric Company— |
| Minitrack beacon, onboard communications
for Mercury spacecraft. |
Melpar, Incorporated, Falls Church,
Virginia— |
| C- and S-band antennas, onboard
communications for Mercury spacecraft. |
Avion Division and G. E.— |
| C- and S-band beacons, onboard
communications for Mercury spacecraft. |
Consolidated Electrodynamics Corporation, St. Louis, Missouri— |
| Tape recorder for Mercury spacecraft. |
Electro-Voice and R. E. Darling Companies, Bethesda, Maryland— |
| Communication devices for Mercury
astronaut pressure suit. |
D. B. Milliken Company, Arcadia,
California— |
| Camera for Mercury spacecraft. |
Waltham Precision Instrument Company,
Waltham, Massachusetts— |
| Satellite clock for Mercury spacecraft.
(Contract was canceled on December 14, 1960, and the component was
replaced with the orbital timing device fabricated by McDonnell
Aircraft Corp.) |
Bendix Radio Division of the Bendix
Corporation, Baltimore, Maryland— |
| Ground-air communications, radar, and
aquisition systems for the Mercury worldwide tracking network. |
Bendix-Pacific Division of the Bendix
Corporation, North Hollywood, California— |
| Telemetry, antennas, displays and radar
data processing for the Mercury worldwide tracking network. |
International Business Machines Corporation
, New York, New York— |
| Computers and computer programming for the
Mercury worldwide tracking network. |
Burns and Roe, Incorporated, New York,
New York— |
| Architecture, site engineering, and
logistics for the Mercury worldwide tracking network. |
Stromberg-Carlson (Division of General
Dynamics), Rochester, New York— |
| Control center consoles for the Mercury
worldwide tracking network. |
Lincoln Laboratory of the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, Lexington, Massachusetts— |
| Technical consulting services to NASA on
all phases of tracking and computing. |
Space Electronics Corporation— |
| Study contract leading to design of
Mercury Control Center. |
Aeronutronics Systems, Incorporated (Division
of Ford Motor Company), Los Angeles, California— |
| Study contract relative to tracking and
computing problems. |
Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corporation, Bethpage, New York— |
| Operations analysis study of recovery
problems associated with a three-orbit mission. |
Tenney Engineering, Incorporated,
Union, New Jersey— |
| Environmental test chamber constructed in
Hanger S, Cape Canaveral, Florida. |
Philco Corporation, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania— |
| Range monitors for Mercury worldwide
tracking network. |
Pan American Airways, Cape Canaveral,
Florida— |
| Atlantic Missile Range operations in
support of Project Mercury. |
Inter-Electronics Corporation, New
York, New York— |
| Static inverters for the Mercury
spacecraft. |
Amp, Incorporated, Greenwich,
Connecticut— |
| Design of stationary egress system. |
Federal Electric Corporation, Cape
Canaveral, Florida— |
| Space telemetry. |
Space Technology Laboratories, Redondo
Beach, California— |
| Analysis of flight instrumentation and
design trajectories for Mercury-Atlas program. |
| |
Headquarters, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Washington, D.C.— |
| General manager of national space program. |
Manned Spacecraft Center (formerly Space Task
Group), Houston, Texas— |
| Project manager for manned space flight
program. |
Langley Research Center, Langley
Field, Virginia— |
| Wind tunnel aerodynamics, fluid mechanics,
stability and control, vibration and flutter, loads, structures,
materials, arc-jet, reentry body, and planning and contracting for
Mercury instrumentation facilities. |
Launch Operations Division (Later Launch
Operations Center), Cape Canaveral, Florida— |
| Launch vehicle manager for
Mercury-Redstone. |
Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio
— |
| Flight propulsion, engine testing,
stabilization and control system for spacecraft. |
Ames Research Center, Moffett Field,
California— |
| Basic and applied research on aeronautical
and space problems, atmosphere reentry forms and high-speed aerodynamic
research. |
Marshall Space Flight Center (formerly
Development Operations Division of ABMA), Huntsville, Alabama— |
| Spacecraft launch vehicle development and
reliability, and trajectory studies for Mercury-Redstone. |
Wallops Station, Wallops Island,
Virginia— |
| Little Joe flight test for Mercury
spacecraft and launch test of Mercury model spacecraft. |
Goddard Space Flight Center,
Greenbelt, Maryland— |
| Coordinated all tracking and processed all
tracking data for Mercury-Redstone and Mercury-Atlas flights. |
Flight Research CenterEdwards,
California— |
| High-speed flight research and drogue
parachute tests. |
Department of Defense, Washington,
D.C.— |
| Launch and recovery operations. |
Weather Bureau of the Department of Commerce
, Washington, D.C.— |
| Weather coverage and studies. |
U.S. Navy, Norfolk, Virginia— |
| Recovery operations. |
Arnold Engineering Development Center,
Tullahoma, Tennessee— |
| High-speed wind tunnel tests. |
Air Force Systems Command, Space Systems
Division, Inglewood, California— |
| Project manager for Atlas launch vehicle. |
Army Missile Command, Huntsville,
Alabama— |
| Project manager for the Redstone launch
vehicle. |
Aviation Medical Acceleration Laboratory
Johnsville, Pennsylvania— |
| Astronaut centrifuge training and
spacecraft couch and restraint harness testing. |
El Centro Naval Parachute Test Facility, El Centro, California— |
| Parachute drop test program. |
Wright Air Development Center, Dayton,
Ohio— |
| Acceleration tests, noise and vibration
study support, astronaut medical examinations, and pressure suit
indoctrination. |
Aero Medical Field Laboratory,
Holloman Air Force Base, New Mexico— |
| Furnished and trained primates for the
Mercury animal program. |
U.S. Air Force Survival School, Stead
Air Force Base, Reno, Nevada— |
| Astronaut desert survival training. |
Aerospace Medical Division, San
Antonio, Texas— |
| Cooperation in bioscience experiments in
the Little Joe flights. |
China Lake Naval Ordnance Test Station, China Lake, California— |
| Fairing-adapter sled tests. |
Pensacola Naval Air Station,
Pensacola, Florida— |
| Astronaut egress training and swimmer
training in support of Mercury spacecraft recovery operations, and
flotation collar fabrication. |
Elgin Air Force Base, Pensacola,
Florida— |
| Astronaut survival training. |
Air Force Chart and Information Center, St. Louis, Missouri— |
| Worldwide Mercury tracking network maps. |
U.S. Army, Fort Eustis, Newport News,
Virginia— |
| Supplied Larc vehicle for recovery. |
Public Health Service, Washington,
D.C.— |
| Supplied medical monitor personnel. |
U.S. Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry
Point, North Carolina— |
| Recovery helicopters. |
Military Air Transport Service, Scott
Air Force Base, Illinois— |
| Air transportation. |
White Sands Missile Range, White
Sands, New Mexico— |
| Tracking facilities. |
Pacific Missile Range, Point Mugu,
California— |
| Tracking facilities. |
Naval Air Station, Corpus Christi,
Texas— |
| Tracking facilities. |
Department of State, Washington, D.C.
— |
| Government-to-government negotiations for
overseas sites in Mercury worldwide tracking network. |
Navy Daingerfield Test Facility,
Daingerfield, California— |
| Spacecraft afterbody shingle heat
resistance and dynamic pressure test. |
Navy Aircrew Equipment Laboratory,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania— |
| Reentry-heat-pulse orientation for the
astronauts and environmental systems training. |
U.S. Air Force Flight Test Center,
Edwards Air Force Base, California— |
| Assistance to NASA Flight Research Center
in parachute drop tests and reefing parameters. |
Army Audit Office, Pasadena,
California— |
| Audit services. |
District Coast Guard, San Francisco,
California— |
| Support services for project. |
Headquarters, U.S. Air Force,
Washington, D.C.— |
| Airlift services and data reduction. |
Walter Reed Army Medical Center,
Washington, D.C.— |
| Animal test program. |
U.S. Navy Comptroller, Washington,
D.C.— |
| Materiel inspection services. |
U.S. Navy Bureau of Ships, Washington,
D.C.— |
| Command receiver equipment and
installation, planned recovery, contingency recovery, and modification
of destroyer davits for spacecraft recovery. |
U.S. Navy Bureau of Weapons,
Washington, D.C.— |
| Consultation, planned recovery, and
recovery operations. |
U.S. Navy Research Laboratory,
Washington, D.C.— |
| Consultive services. |
U.S. Navy Weapons Plant, Washington,
D.C.— |
| Packaging of hardware. |
U.S. Marine Corps Air Facility,
Jacksonville, Florida— |
| Pilot test facility. |
Air Rescue Service, Military Air Transport
Service, Orlando, Florida— |
| Recovery operation support. |
U.S. Navy Bureau of Weapons,
Pensacola, Florida— |
| Fabrication of auxiliary flotation collar
for Mercury spacecraft. |
U.S. Navy School of Aviation Medicine,
Pensacola, Florida— |
| Radiation monitoring for Mercury flights. |
Naval Air Station, Pensacola, Florida
— |
| Spacecraft test flotation collar. |
U.S. European Command, Paris, France— |
| Contingency recovery. |
U.S. Army, Europe, Heidelberg, Germany
and Weisbaden, Germany— |
| Contingency recovery. |
U.S. Air Forces, Europe, Weisbaden,
Germany— |
| Contingency recovery. |
U.S. Air Force Pacific Air Forces,
Hickam Air Force Base, Hawaii— |
| Contingency recovery and photographic
services. |
U.S. Air Force Communications Service,
Scott Air Force Base, Illinois— |
| Communication services during recovery. |
U.S. Navy Bureau of Weapons, St.
Louis, Missouri— |
| Issued Government bill of lading for
Contract NAS 5-59, Mercury spacecraft, also contracting support, etc. |
U.S. Army Audit Agency, New York, New
York— |
| Audit services. |
U.S. Navy Laboratory, Dalgren,
Virginia— |
| Cartridges for Mercury antenna. |
Air Weather Service, Scott Air Force
Base, Illinois— |
| Weather surveillance flights preceding
Mercury manned orbital mission. |
Tactical Air Command, Langley Air
Force Base, Virginia— |
| C-130 aircraft for spacecraft test drops
and photographic coverage. |
U.S. Army Research and Engineering Laboratory
, Natick, Massachusetts— |
| Preliminary studies of calorie and water
requirements for astronauts during orbital flight. |
U.S. Air Force Surgeon General's Office, Washington, D.C.— |
| Compilation of medical monitors' training
program. |